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;









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.










share|improve this question























  • 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


















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.










share|improve this question























  • 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














2












2








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.










share|improve this question
















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















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question



share|improve this question








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













  • 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











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.



enter image description here






share|improve this answer




























  • 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













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
















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









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.



enter image description here






share|improve this answer




























  • 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
















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.



enter image description here






share|improve this answer




























  • 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














12














12










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.



enter image description here






share|improve this answer
















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.



enter image description here







share|improve this answer















share|improve this answer




share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








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


















  • 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



















draft saved

draft discarded















































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.




draft saved


draft discarded














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





















































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









Popular posts from this blog

Invision Community Contents History See also References External links Navigation menuProprietaryinvisioncommunity.comIPS Community ForumsIPS Community Forumsthis blog entry"License Changes, IP.Board 3.4, and the Future""Interview -- Matt Mecham of Ibforums""CEO Invision Power Board, Matt Mecham Is a Liar, Thief!"IPB License Explanation 1.3, 1.3.1, 2.0, and 2.1ArchivedSecurity Fixes, Updates And Enhancements For IPB 1.3.1Archived"New Demo Accounts - Invision Power Services"the original"New Default Skin"the original"Invision Power Board 3.0.0 and Applications Released"the original"Archived copy"the original"Perpetual licenses being done away with""Release Notes - Invision Power Services""Introducing: IPS Community Suite 4!"Invision Community Release Notes

Canceling a color specificationRandomly assigning color to Graphics3D objects?Default color for Filling in Mathematica 9Coloring specific elements of sets with a prime modified order in an array plotHow to pick a color differing significantly from the colors already in a given color list?Detection of the text colorColor numbers based on their valueCan color schemes for use with ColorData include opacity specification?My dynamic color schemes

Ласкавець круглолистий Зміст Опис | Поширення | Галерея | Примітки | Посилання | Навігаційне меню58171138361-22960890446Bupleurum rotundifoliumEuro+Med PlantbasePlants of the World Online — Kew ScienceGermplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN)Ласкавецькн. VI : Літери Ком — Левиправивши або дописавши її