12.07.2015 Views

franchise-star-trek-tng-technical-manual1

franchise-star-trek-tng-technical-manual1

franchise-star-trek-tng-technical-manual1

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

2.7 SAUCER MODULE SEPARATION SYSTEMSthe Saucer Module is equipped only with impulse propulsion,computational modeling has verified that special cautionsmust be observed when attempting separation at high warpfactors. Prior to leaving the protection of the Battle Section'swarp field, the Saucer Module SIF, IDF, and shield grid are runat high output, and its four forward deflectors take over tosweep away debris in the absence of the dish on the BattleSection (See: 7.4). Decaying warp field energy surroundingthe Saucer Module is managed by the driver coil segments ofthe impulse engines. This energy will take, on average, twominutes to dissipate and bring the vehicle to its originalsublight velocity.Discussions of emergency conditions and actions on theparts of both vehicles following separation can also be foundin Sections 11.5, 11.6, and 15.8.EMERGENCY LANDING OF SAUCER MODULEIn the event the Saucer Module is disabled near aplanetary body and cannot maintain a stable orbit, landing thesaucer is the final option. This is to be attempted only whenan acceptable chance of success has been computed and allother available procedures have failed, short of total evacuationby lifeboat modules. If the senior officer aboard theSaucer Module makes the decision that the attempt must bemade, special sets of crew procedures and stored computercommands will be implemented. While extensive computermodeling has been taken into account in creating the landingprograms, no guarantee as to their effectiveness can yet beoffered. SIF reinforcement of the saucer framework is believednecessary to avoid exceeding saucer structural limitsduring atmospheric entry of a Class M planet.Without at least minimal reinforcement, aerodynamicloads associated with most entry profiles may result inspaceframe destruction prior to landing. As it was deemed toocostly to subject a Galaxy class spaceframe to a full-upatmosphere entry test, the computer model is the best availablereference. Starfleet has recorded a total of three datasets from previous smaller <strong>star</strong>ship hull landings, and thesewere extremely helpful in the design of the computer routines.Conventional wisdom believes, however, that the Galaxyclass hull is still outside the survivable performance envelopeand would be unable to successfully perform a deorbit andentry into a Class M compatible atmosphere.A complex set of terrain touchdown options reside in themain computers, taking into account such factors as contactmaterial, air density, humidity, and temperature. If there is anadequate amount of time for sensor scans during the approach,the sensor values will be compared to those inmemory, and the appropriate control adjustments can be sentto the impulse engines and field devices. Beach sand, deepwater, smooth ice, and grassy plains on Class M bodies arepreferable sites; in contrast, certain terrain types have notbeen modeled, such as mountainous surfaces. Other nonterrestrialbodies may possess survivable surfaces, and theirMainBridgeSIFgeneratorsRCSthrustersSaucer ModuleTurboliftinterconnectsUmbilicalinterconnectsDocking latchservosSIFinterconnectsBattle SectionRCSthrustersTurboliftinterconnectsUmbilicalinterconnectsDocking latchservosSIFinterconnectsMainEngineeringSIFgeneratorsBattleBridge2.7.4 Saucer separation latching and umbilical systems

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!