Mfcttrf

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;

2

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

share|improve this question

edited 7 hours ago

Vogon Poet

asked 9 hours ago

Vogon PoetVogon Poet

1,30844 silver badges2828 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

2

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

share|improve this question

edited 7 hours ago

Vogon Poet

asked 9 hours ago

Vogon PoetVogon Poet

1,30844 silver badges2828 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

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

share|improve this question

edited 7 hours ago

Vogon Poet

asked 9 hours ago

Vogon PoetVogon Poet

1,30844 silver badges2828 bronze badges

share|improve this question

edited 7 hours ago

Vogon Poet

asked 9 hours ago

Vogon PoetVogon Poet

1,30844 silver badges2828 bronze badges

share|improve this question

edited 7 hours ago

Vogon Poet

asked 9 hours ago

Vogon PoetVogon Poet

1,30844 silver badges2828 bronze badges

asked 9 hours ago

Vogon PoetVogon Poet

1,30844 silver badges2828 bronze badges

asked 9 hours ago

Vogon PoetVogon Poet

1,30844 silver badges2828 bronze badges

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

12

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.

share|improve this answer

edited 4 hours ago

answered 8 hours ago

elemtilaselemtilas

1,86533 silver badges1717 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
 | 

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
);



);

draft saved

draft discarded

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

Name

Email

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

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

12

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.

share|improve this answer

edited 4 hours ago

answered 8 hours ago

elemtilaselemtilas

1,86533 silver badges1717 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
 | 

12

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.

share|improve this answer

edited 4 hours ago

answered 8 hours ago

elemtilaselemtilas

1,86533 silver badges1717 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
 | 

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.

share|improve this answer

edited 4 hours ago

answered 8 hours ago

elemtilaselemtilas

1,86533 silver badges1717 bronze badges

share|improve this answer

edited 4 hours ago

answered 8 hours ago

elemtilaselemtilas

1,86533 silver badges1717 bronze badges

answered 8 hours ago

elemtilaselemtilas

1,86533 silver badges1717 bronze badges

answered 8 hours ago

elemtilaselemtilas

1,86533 silver badges1717 bronze badges