Corrected Chi Warp Charts

[qerlin]

Sorry...the whole warp speed limit thing I found patently stupid. We don't use it. Why don't you go Warp 900 everywhere? 'Cause the wear & tear on the engines would have you sitting dead in space repairing the thing every couple of days.

[SIR SIG]

Well using the Cochrane Factor (chi), you get your 'warp highways'.

So there would be definate flightpaths between atleast the major worlds with the best/fastest times.

Maybe Ds9 is 1000's ly from earth and between a couple of left and right turns you cross 3 interstate highways and get to earth in 2-3 days.

If thats the case, then for the people who care (like me) will have to watch the eps, work with distances that we know from real stars, work out a chi factor for that distance and plot a route for the warp highway.

'Tis far easy to use an average for all of Fed space.

12.92 strikes me as useful since an optimum range should be in the 5-15 range and thus you can easily devide the original system by 100. So 0 (being a subspace sandbar) - 1500 becomes 0-150. 1 = basic free movement (ie a dirt road) which is the same as canon warp. And 150 becomes the Freeway at 110 kph or or 70 odd mph for you 'Yanks'

------------------
SIR SIG a Aussie TREK Narrator

[Fred]

Originally posted by AlexR:
Except that, going by the canon info, the Okudaic warp chart--which isn't canon, BTW--patently did not work.

Is it not? It's depicted in the ST:TNG Technical Manual, which, to me, would indicate canonity (ok, I don't if that word actually exists). Elaborate, please, Mr. Alex. ^ ^ (pointy-eared smiley)




------------------
"As long as you can laugh, you are not
defeated."

–- Jack Vance

[Greg Smith]

My favourite example:

From the Warp Chart: to cross the Federation takes 6 years at warp 6. (Canon)

From the Chronology: episodes are roughly two weeks apart. (Canon)

Yet in 'Data's Day', the Enterprise is at the Romulan NZ. In the following episode, 'The Wounded', they are on the Cardassian border. Since the Cardies are on roughly the opposite side of the Federation (canon from the DS9:TM), one of these facts is incorrect.

Proof by contradiction.




------------------
Greg

"Calm may work for Locutus of Borg here, but I'm freaked and intend to stay that way."

[AlexR]

Originally posted by Fred:

>Except that, going by the canon info, the
>Okudaic warp chart--which isn't canon,
>BTW--patently did not work.

Is it not? It's depicted in the ST:TNG Technical Manual, which, to me, would indicate canonity (ok, I don't if that word actually exists). Elaborate, please, Mr. Alex. ^ ^ (pointy-eared smiley)

Ahh, but, to quote my favorite Vulcan character, "You proceed from a false assumption."

Canon refers, traditionally, only to what is seen *on screen* in live action Trek episodes and films. Thus, the Tech Manual is not canon. Aspects of it, of course, are derived from canon sources, but much of it sheer speculation, and some of that speculation has been contradicted on screen.

Moreover, the various ships in Trek routinely cover distances far too great for that chart to work without adjustment, which is where the whole idea of the chi factor came from in the first place. The original chi number was worked out from distance and speed figures given in "That Which Survives", but by making it a variable, the authors of _Introduction to Navigation_ introduced a whole range of possibilities for its value, and thus allowed great flexibility in how we talk about actual speeds.

Actually, I erred in one comment in my last post. I should have said that I was uncomfortable with cutting it by a factor of 100. Cutting by a factor of ten, for the average over a larger area of space with more "low matter zones", is something I can be more comfortable with.

The overall ranges, though--1 to 1,500--I absolutely think should be left alone, because they *are* consistent with the kind of speeds seen in Trek (assuming a large Federation with all the real stars at their real distances, etc., an assumption I still stand by).

But, yes, even canonically, the Okudaic chart has a lot of problems, as Greg Smith pointed out quite aptly. Some modification is necessary, without doubt.

Best,
Alex

[SIR SIG]

Yeah but 1-1500 is a really big scale.
In optimum conditions a ship at warp 6 could do 1500ly in 1 day!

I suppose I screwed up by dividing by 100 the 1292 and not the 1500.

Okay, hell even 129.2 is to much.

Maybe a scale of 1-15 with 12.92 as fed average?

If were working on a small fed inner core with large extensions then the borders from cardie to rommmie in a straight line would be around 250-300 ly from what I've deduced. So with a small chi this distance can be covered in 2 weeks.

If you go a large fed then yes a high chi is required but going off the show to get to Deneb you would need to do about 6500 ly a year ie 3250 ly in 6mths which E-D had to do from commissioning to first mission. (Assuming you use the accurate, up to date distance for Deneb).

So assuming E-D could sit on warp 9.2 (top sustainable) {more likely wp 6 - cruise} then a multiplier of 4 is needed.

Using warp 6 then a 16.5 is needed.

Since they probably were using old distances for Deneb (app. 1500 ly) Wp 9.2 (4), Wp 6 (8). An over simplification but over all a chi factor of 5-15 range is required. Thus 12.92 seemed a good number.

Hopefully this example can 'support' my side!

------------------
SIR SIG a Aussie TREK Narrator

[SIR SIG]

Sounds like you've studied the ST Maps as closely as have I.

Never one to have a calculator or warp charts to hand, my figures tend to have a +/- tolerance.

Well 129.2 could work for chi, especially as a smaller amount of 1500. But with all variability in the density of matter, we really need a defined, optimal average that can be used constantly with a +/- tolerance. Even 129.2 isn't going to hold true since that based off 1292 is a TOS figure circa 2271.

And if were going to bye into the chi factor that far, we might as well use all we can from the maps, perhaps only making Cardassia relatively close (or really go for the 1000's of light years distance)

------------------
SIR SIG a Aussie TREK Narrator

[qerlin]

I guess I just not be a real Trek player or something. This isn't to malign you guys or anything, but the idea of sitting with a calculator trying to work out what exactly warp speed is, based off an inconsistently defined scifi show sounds like...well, never mind.

[AlexR]

Originally posted by SIR SIG:
Yeah but 1-1500 is a really big scale.
In optimum conditions a ship at warp 6 could do 1500ly in 1 day!

True, but conditions in which there was that kind of density over distances any greater than a couple of light-years would be exceedingly rare. The 1,500 figure was given as holding in "dense dust and gas clouds", and typically, that kind of matter density isn't readily found in deep space.

Thus, it's not that big a concern, as I see it.

I suppose I screwed up by dividing by 100 the 1292 and not the 1500.

Nah, that's fine if we're playing with the theoretical "average" figure.

If were working on a small fed inner core with large extensions then the borders from cardie to rommmie in a straight line would be around 250-300 ly from what I've deduced. So with a small chi this distance can be covered in 2 weeks.

If you go a large fed then yes a high chi is required but going off the show to get to Deneb you would need to do about 6500 ly a year ie 3250 ly in 6mths which E-D had to do from commissioning to first mission. (Assuming you use the accurate, up to date distance for Deneb).

All the shows, from TOS onward, have had the various ships covering huge distances. Even if one assumes (which I don't) a small core and long pseudopods extending outward, the ships still have to be able to cover a lot of space fairly quickly to get to some of the places mentioned in Trek.

That's why the high chi was worked out in the first place, and why I still lean toward a number that's at least fairly high, if not as high as the one in the Maps.

Don't forget, though, even if one assumes that it was a six-month cruise from Earth to Deneb (which the stardate numbers don't support, translating from commissioning in October 2363 to Farpoint in early January 2364, using the typical calendar conventions), the ship is back in more localized Fed-space for the next episode, roughly 18 days later.

So assuming E-D could sit on warp 9.2 (top sustainable) {more likely wp 6 - cruise} then a multiplier of 4 is needed.

Using warp 6 then a 16.5 is needed.

Since they probably were using old distances for Deneb (app. 1500 ly) Wp 9.2 (4), Wp 6 (8). An over simplification but over all a chi factor of 5-15 range is required. Thus 12.92 seemed a good number.

Okay, to cover 1,500 light-years, we get:

At warp 9 (rounded for ease of calculation), unmodified: Travel-time is just under a year.

At chi = 1292.7238, travel time at warp 9 is just over a quarter of a day.

At chi = 129.27, travel time at warp 9 is 2.8 days.

At chi = 12.93, travel time at warp 9 is 28 days.

At warp 6, unmodified: Travel-time is 3.82 years.

At chi = 1292.7238, travel time at warp 6 is just over a day.

At chi = 129.27, travel time at warp 6 is 10.8 days.

At chi = 12.93, travel time at warp 6 is 108 days.

This, of course, all assumes a constant matter density all the way from inner Fed space to Deneb (using the 1,500 LY distance figure, increase travel-times as appropriate for revised distance figures). If we don't assume that, if we assume variable matter density, the chi numbers could drop or increase, and travel times thus fluctuate through those areas. And if we allow for variable density, it is much more likely, just mathematically, that the numbers will drop than that they'll increase, so we could assume a likelihood of greater travel times.

Hopefully this example can 'support' my side!

I'll absolutely buy into the idea that assuming a constant chi of 1293 doesn't work. But we knew that, 'cause chi's an average. One area of really empty space between here and Deneb, and everything slows down...a lot.

Based on all that, I'd be comfortable with the idea of bringing an average for the Alpha and Beta Quadrants (overall), or even in Federation space, down to the 129.3 figure, but I think going down to 12.93 just doesn't work. Again, just by the numbers.

I also think that even if we adjust the average down by a factor of 10, I think the overall scale of 1-1500 would hold. Actually, looking at it, the 129.3 average makes even more sense on that scale (since, when one thinks about it, the idea that an average over a sphere of 480 parsecs in diameter being 86% of the density in the highest-density regions does seem a bit weird; average density being 8.6% makes more sense), and may indeed provide the best-fit for what we need.

And, as I keep noting, the variability still lets storytellers adjust as needed, at least within limits.

Best,
Alex

[This message has been edited by AlexR (edited 01-25-2001).]

[SIR SIG]

Originally posted by qerlin:
I guess I just not be a real Trek player or something. This isn't to malign you guys or anything, but the idea of sitting with a calculator trying to work out what exactly warp speed is, based off an inconsistently defined scifi show sounds like...well, never mind.

Well this isn't to malign you either, but know one asked you to read it.

Some people around here like to have accurate distances, so naturally in a world were they say bugger all about distances and don't use warp charts that they say are 'good' then we need to critique all data and use what makes sense with reference to the show.

------------------
SIR SIG a Aussie TREK Narrator

[This message has been edited by SIR SIG (edited 01-26-2001).]

[AlexR]

Originally posted by SIR SIG:
Sounds like you've studied the ST Maps as closely as have I.

I bought 'em back in '80, and I've pretty much used 'em as my benchmark for "how it works", at least for its ca. 2271 snapshot, ever since. Sometimes it feels like I've darn near memorized the things.

Never one to have a calculator or warp charts to hand, my figures tend to have a +/- tolerance.

Ditto here, although I do admit to using the calculator built into Windows on my computer.

Well 129.2 could work for chi, especially as a smaller amount of 1500. But with all variability in the density of matter, we really need a defined, optimal average that can be used constantly with a +/- tolerance. Even 129.2 isn't going to hold true since that based off 1292 is a TOS figure circa 2271.

True, although I'd be a lot more willing to use that as an average over larger areas of space, at least within the spiral arms of the galaxy where the general stellar density is about the same as what's in UFP space. If we want to factor an average over the entire disk, it probably has to come down further to account for a lot of empty space between the arms.

At that point, though, it's almost more realistic to just establish that 129.2 is for space with roughly average matter densities, and note that it could spike well up or down, depending on the characteristics of individual areas of space. The alternative is to argue that UFP space is definably non-average, and try to guess how non-average it might be.

And if were going to bye into the chi factor that far, we might as well use all we can from the maps, perhaps only making Cardassia relatively close (or really go for the 1000's of light years distance)

Absolutely. I still assume a Fed space that is considerably larger in 2375 than the 480 parsec sphere of 2271, possibly as much--at its geatest extent--as the 8,000 LY (2,454 parsecs) figure Picard quoted. I make assumption that exploration and expansion continued from that sphere, although in short order the Federation would no longer be spherical.

I could easily see Cardassia as a good couple of hundred parsecs away. While individual Cardassians, or even ships, might have been encountered as early as the early 23rd Century (as DS9 has told us of at least one individual), enough contact between their actual territories to lead to conflicts might easily not have occurred until the early 24th Century.

And to second the answer to qerlin, why do we spend this much time at it? 'Cause it's fun and it makes the fiction hang together that much more for us...which we enjoy.

Best,
Alex

[SIR SIG]

Well I can bye all that, though Deneb has to change. Peg it at the 1500 ly they would have used for real data at the time (haven't measured the map).

So we'd have to put the alpha/beta line through the outskirts of the Sol system and abolish the Central Navigation Beacon.

Oh and a little rumor (I trust the source, but their source could be different) is that the maps may become an update ed c. 2002

Let me get this right:
So keep the scale as 0 (warp sandbar) - 1500 (warp super highway). Peg the overall federation average as 1292 for chi and then extrapolate from the maps. Extra Fed would be chi=129.2 ???

Okay so then Romulus is 128 Trianguli, and is (off the top of my head) app. 300 ly. Which in its vicinity has to be reached from Earth during the Romulan War with ships that would max out at warp 4 tops (TOS scale).

A couple of quick calcs at warp 3 cruise gets app. 95 ly/day. Thus Earth ships could reach Cheron in around 3 days, assuming the average holds over the distance.

See there's my point, we need a +/- tolerance. If we use 1292 then what percentage of tolerance can we use for 'artistic license'? 1% 5% ???

Okay so the maps were 480 parsecs (1564.8 ly) as a radius from the CNB, which itself is removed from Earth by (from memory) 23 parsecs (75 ly). Guess that explains Deneb's distance (1564). So that's 3000 odd ly so far, 5000 to go with most of it out spinward way.



------------------
SIR SIG a Aussie TREK Narrator

[SIR SIG]

Oh and if 1292 is the TOS fed average, what will become of a TNG/DS9/VOY fed av?

129.2?

------------------
SIR SIG a Aussie TREK Narrator

[AlexR]

Originally posted by SIR SIG:
Well I can bye all that, though Deneb has to change. Peg it at the 1500 ly they would have used for real data at the time (haven't measured the map).

Although even at the revised distance, using 129.2 as the modified chi average, the E-D could get back from Deneb to the encounter with the Tsiolkovsky in enough time for the stardates to make sense.

So we'd have to put the alpha/beta line through the outskirts of the Sol system and abolish the Central Navigation Beacon.

We could leave the beacon, but wouldn't be "central" anymore, of course. It worked for the territory of the Federation as described ca. 2271 or so, but if the established spaces change, the network would have to change and evolve with them.

Oh and a little rumor (I trust the source, but their source could be different) is that the maps may become an update ed c. 2002

Interesting rumor, although I'd question it. Bantam would be able to reprint what they have, but couldn't change it. They don't have the rights to do anything new. And unless Pocket's editors are being *extremely* secretive, there's no such plan coming out of the publishers who *do* have the rights to do new stuff.

That said, I'd love to see a reprint from Bantam. Maybe tied into the 35th Anniversay commemorations?

Let me get this right:
So keep the scale as 0 (warp sandbar) - 1500 (warp super highway). Peg the overall federation average as 1292 for chi and then extrapolate from the maps. Extra Fed would be chi=129.2 ???

I could even buy the idea that the Maps erred, and 1292 was just too high for an average, and assume that 129.2 would hold for that area of space throughout relevant history.

But, yeah, I think the scale of 1-1,500 from sandbar to superhighway works.

Okay so then Romulus is 128 Trianguli, and is (off the top of my head) app. 300 ly. Which in its vicinity has to be reached from Earth during the Romulan War with ships that would max out at warp 4 tops (TOS scale).

Okay. Warp 4 is 64c x chi, so at chi = 129.2, 300 LY would be travelable in 13.24 days (and in 1.32 days at chi = 1292).

A couple of quick calcs at warp 3 cruise gets app. 95 ly/day. Thus Earth ships could reach Cheron in around 3 days, assuming the average holds over the distance.

Using the 1292 average figure, yes.

If we assume the 129.2 average, it's more like 30 days, but if we assume there are areas of higher density, we could spike the speed up and the travel time down.

See there's my point, we need a +/- tolerance. If we use 1292 then what percentage of tolerance can we use for 'artistic license'? 1% 5% ???

I'm not sure I'm following you here. What is the tolerance measuring? How much density variability there might be along a course? What percentage of a given trip could be assumed to ride along at average matter densities? (I may just be being dense today. )

Okay so the maps were 480 parsecs (1564.8 ly) as a radius from the CNB, which itself is removed from Earth by (from memory) 23 parsecs (75 ly). Guess that explains Deneb's distance (1564). So that's 3000 odd ly so far, 5000 to go with most of it out spinward way.

Actually, if I'm recollecting right (and I need to double-check this to be sure), the maps are telling us that the 480 parsecs is the diameter of the sphere, rather than its radius. So from the CNB to the extents of fully-claimed Fed space at the time was 240 parsecs (782 LY), which is consistent with the Maps' claim that it was the acquisition of the Rigel system that was key in setting the extents of Fed space as they were known at the time.

Clearly the UFP has grown a lot by 2373.

Best,
Alex

[Penta]

OK...how does one convert stardates to the Gregorian calendar?