Talk:Nacelle

From Memory Alpha, the free Star Trek reference.

Contents 1 Separation 2 Evolution 3 Quantity 4 Defiant and Steamrunner nacelles 5 Background 6 The Catwalk 7 Defiant nacelles

[edit] Separation

Nacelle separation system? I didn't realize there was such a thing. Was it actually shown in any episode? And if it is canon, I wonder why the crew of the Enterprise-D didn't use that capability. (I know, because they wanted a new ship for the "let's go fight the Borg" movie.)  ;) Ekedolphin 06:57, 26 Sep 2005 (UTC)

I thought the same thing. I don't recall any episodes of TNG, DS9 or VOY where this capability is mentioned. It might be mentioned in the DS9 or TNG Technical manual, but those books are apocryphal and contradict canon in many cases. PB5K 01:17, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

The only direct mention of nacelle separation capability is in the tech manuals, which suggest it is performed when damage to their plasma injectors endangers the ship. However, it is widely accepted that Matt Jeffries' original concept for engine nacelles was shaped by his idea that they produced energies that were potentially hazardous to the crew, and should therefore be located away from the main body of the ship; ejection capabilities are a logical extension of this idea (though I'm not sure Jeffries ever explicitly mentioned them).

The only canon reference I can think of is in The Apple, where Kirk famously advises Scotty to "drop the engines and blast out with the main section" or something of that nature. 67.150.76.24 03:54, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Evolution

Perhaps a section on the evolution of the nacelle over time could be added? I got to thinking about it based on the similarities between the necelles of the Phoenix and Friendship 1. Jaf 16:26, 11 Aug 2005 (UTC)Jaf

[edit] Quantity

What I'm still missing is an explanation of Federation ships in Star Trek having 2, 3 or even 4 nacelles. If it has to do with warp-fiel geometry and symmetry (a possible explanation), I think it should be listed both here and on warp field.-- Redge | Talk 17:23, 13 Aug 2004 (CEST)

I disagree. An explanation might be missing, but as long as it is just speculation (as far as I know, warp geometry and symmetry were never mentioned on-screen in this context), we shouldn't include it just because it is a possible explanation. -- Cid Highwind 17:40, 13 Aug 2004 (CEST)

I didn't say it was THE explanation. It is an explanation I remeber reading somewhere. If no explanation exists, a note at the very least should be added. -- Redge | Talk 17:49, 13 Aug 2004 (CEST)

I believe there was a statement in the ST:TNG Technical Manual that stated that two nacelles (or multiples thereof) constituted the 'most efficient' configuration. Also remember that Gene Roddenberry insisted on all Starfleet vessels having even numbers of nacelles. 0:19, 22 May 2005 (MST)

Yes, it was mentioned in the Technical Manual that two nacelles was the best configuration. So I added that to the article. --Jesster79 17:52, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps something like "they don't all have two, we don't know why", (better wording tho)? Tyrant 04:59, 27 Feb 2005 (GMT)Tyrant

Soemthing more like: "Although most starships typically have two, it is not unheard of for these vessels to have additional nacelles. There has been no explaination given on this matter." --Gvsualan 06:02, 27 Feb 2005 (GMT)

Sounds good to me, pure poetry. Add away. Tyrant 06:05, 27 Feb 2005 (GMT)Tyrant

Any idea on what we've seen for warp nacelle counts, even outside SF vessels? Other than 3 on the AGT Enterprise-D, and 4 on the Constellation/Prometheus? There probably should be a note as well that not all vessels utilize nacelles for faster-than-light space travel. --Gvsualan 06:21, 27 Feb 2005 (GMT)

Presumably, the reason that the Prometheus has 4 nacelles is that so when the ship separates into its multi-vector assault mode, the two rear sections would both be capable of warp speeds. It would not surprise me to learn that the upper and lower nacelles were both supplyied by completely independent warp drive systems for this very purpose.

Is it just me, or does the Gorn starship look like it has a 5 nacelle configuration. [1] [2] Four on the pylons and the fifth extending from the main hull... I don't know if it's too ambiguous to note here. --Pseudohuman 19:08, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Defiant and Steamrunner nacelles

Why does this say these two classes of ships don't have nacelles? The Defiant has them, their just pulled into the ships body more. And the steamrunner's nacelles hold that back section onto the rest of the ship.

[edit] Background

Dunno where I read this stuff, but if someone knows a source, maybe it can be added.

• Matt Jefferies situated the nacelles away from the ship because he felt the tremendous forces involved in propulsion might be unhealthy for the crew to be in close proximity to.
• Gene Roddenberry declared that Federation starships could only have even numbers of nacelles. -- StAkAr Karnak 16:04, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

I've seen the note about Gene Roddenberry around the internet, but never in an official source (to be fair, I don't have very many official sources). --OuroborosCobra ^talk 16:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Catwalk

Perhaps there should be a reference to "The Catwalk", since most of that episode happens within the nacelles. -- StAkAr Karnak 03:49, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

did some quick work on it. Deevolution 04:07, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Defiant nacelles

Their positioning on the Defiant class is specifically to better protect them from weapons fire from the front, also evidenced by the placement of the field grills on the back of the nacelles.

I am removing this note. It has gone 4 months without citation. It can be returned to the article if properly cited. --OuroborosCobra ^talk 07:09, 19 November 2007 (UTC)