Why are Starfleet vessels designed with nacelles so far away from the hull?Nacelles: if two are better than one, then why are three not better than two?Why was the Defiant so small?What languages is Data fluent in?Those white one-piece engineering suits in the original series filmsHow would Starfleet know what a Romulan looks like in Star Trek 2009?Which actor appears as the most different species in Star Trek?Why isn't Spock sucked into space?Are the Cardassians (and Breen) required to withdraw from their homeworlds?Are Starfleet vessels allowed to travel freely in Klingon space?Are there any Starfleet vessels named after non-humans?
Why are seats at the rear of a plane sometimes unavailable even though many other seats are available in the plane?
Why are Starfleet vessels designed with nacelles so far away from the hull?
Why is CMYK & PNG not possible?
How do I weigh a kitchen island to determine what size castors to get?
What good is the paladin's Divine Sense?
Little Endian Number to String Conversion
what to upgrade first
How can I replicate this effect of the Infinity Gauntlet using official material?
Why did Batman design Robin's suit with only the underwear without pants?
Drawing Super Mario Bros.....in LaTeX
bash - sum numbers in a variable
How to remind myself to lock my doors
How to use an equalizer?
Why is it so hard to land on the Moon?
Is it realistic that an advanced species isn't good at war?
Can you decide not to sneak into a room after seeing your roll?
Can you take Bowwow out after returning him to MeowMeow?
Is there a practical way of making democratic-like system skewed towards competence?
Is consistent disregard for students' time "normal" in undergraduate research?
How can my hammerspace safely "decompress"?
Fill a bowl with alphabet soup
My professor says my digit summing code is flawed. Is he right?
Can the bass be used instead of drums?
How honest to be with US immigration about uncertainty about travel plans?
Why are Starfleet vessels designed with nacelles so far away from the hull?
Nacelles: if two are better than one, then why are three not better than two?Why was the Defiant so small?What languages is Data fluent in?Those white one-piece engineering suits in the original series filmsHow would Starfleet know what a Romulan looks like in Star Trek 2009?Which actor appears as the most different species in Star Trek?Why isn't Spock sucked into space?Are the Cardassians (and Breen) required to withdraw from their homeworlds?Are Starfleet vessels allowed to travel freely in Klingon space?Are there any Starfleet vessels named after non-humans?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty
margin-bottom:0;
Based on the film and television events, it seems early shows had Klingon, Romulan, Vulcan, Breen, and Starfleet ships having nacelles placed far away from the hull on struts or wings. On the other hand, Ferengi and Cardassian ships have their warp coils in or near the ship's hull.
I need to define "far away" as it differs from "how many."
This question asks about distance, like "why not put nacelles close to the body?" This question does NOT care about the number of nacelles, It is simply interesting to know why most Starfleet ships stick their nacelles out so far. Please avoid answers talking about counting engine parts, that question has been asked - unless somehow the number of nacelles requires them to be far apart.
Aside from "coolness," why are nacelles kept away from the hull in Starfleet vessels? Some races can incorporate the nacelles within the hull, others agree with Human design. I'm interested if anything in-universe (not extended universes) gives us an explanation for the way we see these ships on screen.
I grant that even in the real world some engineers disregard safety. That would be my blind guess. It just sort of looks vulnerable.
star-trek
|
show 16 more comments
Based on the film and television events, it seems early shows had Klingon, Romulan, Vulcan, Breen, and Starfleet ships having nacelles placed far away from the hull on struts or wings. On the other hand, Ferengi and Cardassian ships have their warp coils in or near the ship's hull.
I need to define "far away" as it differs from "how many."
This question asks about distance, like "why not put nacelles close to the body?" This question does NOT care about the number of nacelles, It is simply interesting to know why most Starfleet ships stick their nacelles out so far. Please avoid answers talking about counting engine parts, that question has been asked - unless somehow the number of nacelles requires them to be far apart.
Aside from "coolness," why are nacelles kept away from the hull in Starfleet vessels? Some races can incorporate the nacelles within the hull, others agree with Human design. I'm interested if anything in-universe (not extended universes) gives us an explanation for the way we see these ships on screen.
I grant that even in the real world some engineers disregard safety. That would be my blind guess. It just sort of looks vulnerable.
star-trek
1
Voyager's nacelles actually 'moved into position' before a jump to warp. While this may have been a 'coolness' addition, in-universe Voyager was able to park on a planet. The Defiant's design kept the nacelles integrated into the main hull.
– Jeeped
8 hours ago
1
the non-canon (released a little prior to Generations iirc, but excellent) book "Federation" goes into some detail er: Cochran's design and the pseudo-science behind nacelle placement, warp field design, and even the Starfleet 'delta' logo. I can provide a more detailed answer from this source, but this one is decidely not canon since it directly conflicts with the events of the films "Generations" and "First Contact" (it would have made a better film instead of Generations imo)
– NKCampbell
8 hours ago
1
It's unclear on whether you are looking for an in-universe explanation from a Starfleet engineer's point of view or Walter Matthew 'Matt' Jefferies' motivation behind the original design of the NCC-1701.
– Jeeped
8 hours ago
1
Your question is dealt with in the duplicate answer. In short, the nacelles need to be able to "see" each other.
– Valorum
8 hours ago
2
Ive removed the stuff about weiners, it’s not needed at all and detracts from the question. I have no idea why it was included please do not add it back in again.
– TheLethalCarrot
7 hours ago
|
show 16 more comments
Based on the film and television events, it seems early shows had Klingon, Romulan, Vulcan, Breen, and Starfleet ships having nacelles placed far away from the hull on struts or wings. On the other hand, Ferengi and Cardassian ships have their warp coils in or near the ship's hull.
I need to define "far away" as it differs from "how many."
This question asks about distance, like "why not put nacelles close to the body?" This question does NOT care about the number of nacelles, It is simply interesting to know why most Starfleet ships stick their nacelles out so far. Please avoid answers talking about counting engine parts, that question has been asked - unless somehow the number of nacelles requires them to be far apart.
Aside from "coolness," why are nacelles kept away from the hull in Starfleet vessels? Some races can incorporate the nacelles within the hull, others agree with Human design. I'm interested if anything in-universe (not extended universes) gives us an explanation for the way we see these ships on screen.
I grant that even in the real world some engineers disregard safety. That would be my blind guess. It just sort of looks vulnerable.
star-trek
Based on the film and television events, it seems early shows had Klingon, Romulan, Vulcan, Breen, and Starfleet ships having nacelles placed far away from the hull on struts or wings. On the other hand, Ferengi and Cardassian ships have their warp coils in or near the ship's hull.
I need to define "far away" as it differs from "how many."
This question asks about distance, like "why not put nacelles close to the body?" This question does NOT care about the number of nacelles, It is simply interesting to know why most Starfleet ships stick their nacelles out so far. Please avoid answers talking about counting engine parts, that question has been asked - unless somehow the number of nacelles requires them to be far apart.
Aside from "coolness," why are nacelles kept away from the hull in Starfleet vessels? Some races can incorporate the nacelles within the hull, others agree with Human design. I'm interested if anything in-universe (not extended universes) gives us an explanation for the way we see these ships on screen.
I grant that even in the real world some engineers disregard safety. That would be my blind guess. It just sort of looks vulnerable.
star-trek
star-trek
edited 7 hours ago
Vogon Poet
asked 9 hours ago
Vogon PoetVogon Poet
1,3084 silver badges28 bronze badges
1,3084 silver badges28 bronze badges
1
Voyager's nacelles actually 'moved into position' before a jump to warp. While this may have been a 'coolness' addition, in-universe Voyager was able to park on a planet. The Defiant's design kept the nacelles integrated into the main hull.
– Jeeped
8 hours ago
1
the non-canon (released a little prior to Generations iirc, but excellent) book "Federation" goes into some detail er: Cochran's design and the pseudo-science behind nacelle placement, warp field design, and even the Starfleet 'delta' logo. I can provide a more detailed answer from this source, but this one is decidely not canon since it directly conflicts with the events of the films "Generations" and "First Contact" (it would have made a better film instead of Generations imo)
– NKCampbell
8 hours ago
1
It's unclear on whether you are looking for an in-universe explanation from a Starfleet engineer's point of view or Walter Matthew 'Matt' Jefferies' motivation behind the original design of the NCC-1701.
– Jeeped
8 hours ago
1
Your question is dealt with in the duplicate answer. In short, the nacelles need to be able to "see" each other.
– Valorum
8 hours ago
2
Ive removed the stuff about weiners, it’s not needed at all and detracts from the question. I have no idea why it was included please do not add it back in again.
– TheLethalCarrot
7 hours ago
|
show 16 more comments
1
Voyager's nacelles actually 'moved into position' before a jump to warp. While this may have been a 'coolness' addition, in-universe Voyager was able to park on a planet. The Defiant's design kept the nacelles integrated into the main hull.
– Jeeped
8 hours ago
1
the non-canon (released a little prior to Generations iirc, but excellent) book "Federation" goes into some detail er: Cochran's design and the pseudo-science behind nacelle placement, warp field design, and even the Starfleet 'delta' logo. I can provide a more detailed answer from this source, but this one is decidely not canon since it directly conflicts with the events of the films "Generations" and "First Contact" (it would have made a better film instead of Generations imo)
– NKCampbell
8 hours ago
1
It's unclear on whether you are looking for an in-universe explanation from a Starfleet engineer's point of view or Walter Matthew 'Matt' Jefferies' motivation behind the original design of the NCC-1701.
– Jeeped
8 hours ago
1
Your question is dealt with in the duplicate answer. In short, the nacelles need to be able to "see" each other.
– Valorum
8 hours ago
2
Ive removed the stuff about weiners, it’s not needed at all and detracts from the question. I have no idea why it was included please do not add it back in again.
– TheLethalCarrot
7 hours ago
1
1
Voyager's nacelles actually 'moved into position' before a jump to warp. While this may have been a 'coolness' addition, in-universe Voyager was able to park on a planet. The Defiant's design kept the nacelles integrated into the main hull.
– Jeeped
8 hours ago
Voyager's nacelles actually 'moved into position' before a jump to warp. While this may have been a 'coolness' addition, in-universe Voyager was able to park on a planet. The Defiant's design kept the nacelles integrated into the main hull.
– Jeeped
8 hours ago
1
1
the non-canon (released a little prior to Generations iirc, but excellent) book "Federation" goes into some detail er: Cochran's design and the pseudo-science behind nacelle placement, warp field design, and even the Starfleet 'delta' logo. I can provide a more detailed answer from this source, but this one is decidely not canon since it directly conflicts with the events of the films "Generations" and "First Contact" (it would have made a better film instead of Generations imo)
– NKCampbell
8 hours ago
the non-canon (released a little prior to Generations iirc, but excellent) book "Federation" goes into some detail er: Cochran's design and the pseudo-science behind nacelle placement, warp field design, and even the Starfleet 'delta' logo. I can provide a more detailed answer from this source, but this one is decidely not canon since it directly conflicts with the events of the films "Generations" and "First Contact" (it would have made a better film instead of Generations imo)
– NKCampbell
8 hours ago
1
1
It's unclear on whether you are looking for an in-universe explanation from a Starfleet engineer's point of view or Walter Matthew 'Matt' Jefferies' motivation behind the original design of the NCC-1701.
– Jeeped
8 hours ago
It's unclear on whether you are looking for an in-universe explanation from a Starfleet engineer's point of view or Walter Matthew 'Matt' Jefferies' motivation behind the original design of the NCC-1701.
– Jeeped
8 hours ago
1
1
Your question is dealt with in the duplicate answer. In short, the nacelles need to be able to "see" each other.
– Valorum
8 hours ago
Your question is dealt with in the duplicate answer. In short, the nacelles need to be able to "see" each other.
– Valorum
8 hours ago
2
2
Ive removed the stuff about weiners, it’s not needed at all and detracts from the question. I have no idea why it was included please do not add it back in again.
– TheLethalCarrot
7 hours ago
Ive removed the stuff about weiners, it’s not needed at all and detracts from the question. I have no idea why it was included please do not add it back in again.
– TheLethalCarrot
7 hours ago
|
show 16 more comments
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
Apart from simple narrative necessity, I think we can extrapolate from the original Enterprise blueprints (Paramount 1975) that radiation is the answer.
When we look at the plan for the Support Pylon (where the famous Jeffries Tube is located), we see two safety locks located in the pylon. There are notations for each. The lower safety lock:
Warning: Entry beyond this safety lock permissible only with anti-radiation suits.
The upper safety lock:
Warning: Entry beyond this safety lock permissible only with environmental suits and entire main propulsion unit shut down.
Presumably, if you wander far enough up the Jeffries Tube without proper safety equipment, you're not going to coming back down again, except in a body bag.
a link to that blueprint would be awesome - good find
– NKCampbell
8 hours ago
1
+1 Despite this not seeming to make much sense of the design of the Reliant.
– Todd Wilcox
5 hours ago
@ToddWilcox --- One might conjecture that between the time of the old Enterprise of the TV series and the newer Enterprise of the movie era, they figured out a way of dealing with the radiation issue. Other conjectures abound.
– elemtilas
4 hours ago
There obviously remain questions because this configuration is widely used, but not ubiquitous. We can certainly say that Reliant was a warship and it was absolutely necessary to avoid the "big long sticks," so it had some radically unique design features that were impractical on mass-produced long-haul starships. These are all exploration and research vessels, after all. Love this post, do want more!
– Vogon Poet
3 hours ago
add a comment
|
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "186"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fscifi.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f221025%2fwhy-are-starfleet-vessels-designed-with-nacelles-so-far-away-from-the-hull%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Apart from simple narrative necessity, I think we can extrapolate from the original Enterprise blueprints (Paramount 1975) that radiation is the answer.
When we look at the plan for the Support Pylon (where the famous Jeffries Tube is located), we see two safety locks located in the pylon. There are notations for each. The lower safety lock:
Warning: Entry beyond this safety lock permissible only with anti-radiation suits.
The upper safety lock:
Warning: Entry beyond this safety lock permissible only with environmental suits and entire main propulsion unit shut down.
Presumably, if you wander far enough up the Jeffries Tube without proper safety equipment, you're not going to coming back down again, except in a body bag.
a link to that blueprint would be awesome - good find
– NKCampbell
8 hours ago
1
+1 Despite this not seeming to make much sense of the design of the Reliant.
– Todd Wilcox
5 hours ago
@ToddWilcox --- One might conjecture that between the time of the old Enterprise of the TV series and the newer Enterprise of the movie era, they figured out a way of dealing with the radiation issue. Other conjectures abound.
– elemtilas
4 hours ago
There obviously remain questions because this configuration is widely used, but not ubiquitous. We can certainly say that Reliant was a warship and it was absolutely necessary to avoid the "big long sticks," so it had some radically unique design features that were impractical on mass-produced long-haul starships. These are all exploration and research vessels, after all. Love this post, do want more!
– Vogon Poet
3 hours ago
add a comment
|
Apart from simple narrative necessity, I think we can extrapolate from the original Enterprise blueprints (Paramount 1975) that radiation is the answer.
When we look at the plan for the Support Pylon (where the famous Jeffries Tube is located), we see two safety locks located in the pylon. There are notations for each. The lower safety lock:
Warning: Entry beyond this safety lock permissible only with anti-radiation suits.
The upper safety lock:
Warning: Entry beyond this safety lock permissible only with environmental suits and entire main propulsion unit shut down.
Presumably, if you wander far enough up the Jeffries Tube without proper safety equipment, you're not going to coming back down again, except in a body bag.
a link to that blueprint would be awesome - good find
– NKCampbell
8 hours ago
1
+1 Despite this not seeming to make much sense of the design of the Reliant.
– Todd Wilcox
5 hours ago
@ToddWilcox --- One might conjecture that between the time of the old Enterprise of the TV series and the newer Enterprise of the movie era, they figured out a way of dealing with the radiation issue. Other conjectures abound.
– elemtilas
4 hours ago
There obviously remain questions because this configuration is widely used, but not ubiquitous. We can certainly say that Reliant was a warship and it was absolutely necessary to avoid the "big long sticks," so it had some radically unique design features that were impractical on mass-produced long-haul starships. These are all exploration and research vessels, after all. Love this post, do want more!
– Vogon Poet
3 hours ago
add a comment
|
Apart from simple narrative necessity, I think we can extrapolate from the original Enterprise blueprints (Paramount 1975) that radiation is the answer.
When we look at the plan for the Support Pylon (where the famous Jeffries Tube is located), we see two safety locks located in the pylon. There are notations for each. The lower safety lock:
Warning: Entry beyond this safety lock permissible only with anti-radiation suits.
The upper safety lock:
Warning: Entry beyond this safety lock permissible only with environmental suits and entire main propulsion unit shut down.
Presumably, if you wander far enough up the Jeffries Tube without proper safety equipment, you're not going to coming back down again, except in a body bag.
Apart from simple narrative necessity, I think we can extrapolate from the original Enterprise blueprints (Paramount 1975) that radiation is the answer.
When we look at the plan for the Support Pylon (where the famous Jeffries Tube is located), we see two safety locks located in the pylon. There are notations for each. The lower safety lock:
Warning: Entry beyond this safety lock permissible only with anti-radiation suits.
The upper safety lock:
Warning: Entry beyond this safety lock permissible only with environmental suits and entire main propulsion unit shut down.
Presumably, if you wander far enough up the Jeffries Tube without proper safety equipment, you're not going to coming back down again, except in a body bag.
edited 4 hours ago
answered 8 hours ago
elemtilaselemtilas
1,8653 silver badges17 bronze badges
1,8653 silver badges17 bronze badges
a link to that blueprint would be awesome - good find
– NKCampbell
8 hours ago
1
+1 Despite this not seeming to make much sense of the design of the Reliant.
– Todd Wilcox
5 hours ago
@ToddWilcox --- One might conjecture that between the time of the old Enterprise of the TV series and the newer Enterprise of the movie era, they figured out a way of dealing with the radiation issue. Other conjectures abound.
– elemtilas
4 hours ago
There obviously remain questions because this configuration is widely used, but not ubiquitous. We can certainly say that Reliant was a warship and it was absolutely necessary to avoid the "big long sticks," so it had some radically unique design features that were impractical on mass-produced long-haul starships. These are all exploration and research vessels, after all. Love this post, do want more!
– Vogon Poet
3 hours ago
add a comment
|
a link to that blueprint would be awesome - good find
– NKCampbell
8 hours ago
1
+1 Despite this not seeming to make much sense of the design of the Reliant.
– Todd Wilcox
5 hours ago
@ToddWilcox --- One might conjecture that between the time of the old Enterprise of the TV series and the newer Enterprise of the movie era, they figured out a way of dealing with the radiation issue. Other conjectures abound.
– elemtilas
4 hours ago
There obviously remain questions because this configuration is widely used, but not ubiquitous. We can certainly say that Reliant was a warship and it was absolutely necessary to avoid the "big long sticks," so it had some radically unique design features that were impractical on mass-produced long-haul starships. These are all exploration and research vessels, after all. Love this post, do want more!
– Vogon Poet
3 hours ago
a link to that blueprint would be awesome - good find
– NKCampbell
8 hours ago
a link to that blueprint would be awesome - good find
– NKCampbell
8 hours ago
1
1
+1 Despite this not seeming to make much sense of the design of the Reliant.
– Todd Wilcox
5 hours ago
+1 Despite this not seeming to make much sense of the design of the Reliant.
– Todd Wilcox
5 hours ago
@ToddWilcox --- One might conjecture that between the time of the old Enterprise of the TV series and the newer Enterprise of the movie era, they figured out a way of dealing with the radiation issue. Other conjectures abound.
– elemtilas
4 hours ago
@ToddWilcox --- One might conjecture that between the time of the old Enterprise of the TV series and the newer Enterprise of the movie era, they figured out a way of dealing with the radiation issue. Other conjectures abound.
– elemtilas
4 hours ago
There obviously remain questions because this configuration is widely used, but not ubiquitous. We can certainly say that Reliant was a warship and it was absolutely necessary to avoid the "big long sticks," so it had some radically unique design features that were impractical on mass-produced long-haul starships. These are all exploration and research vessels, after all. Love this post, do want more!
– Vogon Poet
3 hours ago
There obviously remain questions because this configuration is widely used, but not ubiquitous. We can certainly say that Reliant was a warship and it was absolutely necessary to avoid the "big long sticks," so it had some radically unique design features that were impractical on mass-produced long-haul starships. These are all exploration and research vessels, after all. Love this post, do want more!
– Vogon Poet
3 hours ago
add a comment
|
Thanks for contributing an answer to Science Fiction & Fantasy Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fscifi.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f221025%2fwhy-are-starfleet-vessels-designed-with-nacelles-so-far-away-from-the-hull%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
Voyager's nacelles actually 'moved into position' before a jump to warp. While this may have been a 'coolness' addition, in-universe Voyager was able to park on a planet. The Defiant's design kept the nacelles integrated into the main hull.
– Jeeped
8 hours ago
1
the non-canon (released a little prior to Generations iirc, but excellent) book "Federation" goes into some detail er: Cochran's design and the pseudo-science behind nacelle placement, warp field design, and even the Starfleet 'delta' logo. I can provide a more detailed answer from this source, but this one is decidely not canon since it directly conflicts with the events of the films "Generations" and "First Contact" (it would have made a better film instead of Generations imo)
– NKCampbell
8 hours ago
1
It's unclear on whether you are looking for an in-universe explanation from a Starfleet engineer's point of view or Walter Matthew 'Matt' Jefferies' motivation behind the original design of the NCC-1701.
– Jeeped
8 hours ago
1
Your question is dealt with in the duplicate answer. In short, the nacelles need to be able to "see" each other.
– Valorum
8 hours ago
2
Ive removed the stuff about weiners, it’s not needed at all and detracts from the question. I have no idea why it was included please do not add it back in again.
– TheLethalCarrot
7 hours ago