Talk:Saucer separation

Featured article status

FA nomination (11 April 2005, Successful)

Saucer separation -- I think this page shows all the information you could think of about saucer separation. It also contains background information that I found very interesting. The pictures used back up the text, and enhance certain points. zsingaya 02:14, 1 Apr 2005 (EST)

• Support. Extended write-up with good pictures. Perfect! Ottens 08:37, 9 Apr 2005 (EDT)
• Support. This is a superbly written article. The pictures suit it nicely. Probably the best non-featured article I've read so far. --Scimitar 19:51, 10 Apr 2005 (EDT)"

• Archived: I've included here the support made for this article to be made into a featured article: (zsingaya 11:29, 11 Apr 2005 (EDT))

Removal suggestion (15 November 2010, Withdrawn)

From: Memory Alpha:Featured article removal candidates

Saucer separation

This is another article featured a while back that has a nearly citation-less background information section, despite containing numerous claims. Gvsualan added incite tags back in February, but many still remain. Unless they are resolved this article should be removed as a Featured Article. – Cleanse ^{( talk | contribs )} 11:22, October 19, 2010 (UTC)

Support removal unless problems are addressed.--31dot 19:00, October 19, 2010 (UTC)

Support, due to the lack of citations. --Defiant 09:45, October 26, 2010 (UTC)

I too Support this. -- TrekFan ^Talk 22:46, October 30, 2010 (UTC)

Update - SmokeDetector47 has provided the missing citations, and it all looks ship-shape now. Unless anyone has further reasons for FA removal, I will archive this discussion.– Cleanse ^{( talk | contribs )} 04:23, November 11, 2010 (UTC)

Archived.– Cleanse ^{( talk | contribs )} 01:02, November 15, 2010 (UTC)

Sources Required

• "Commander Riker suggested a saucer separation shortly before the Enterprise was sent to investigate possible Romulan activity later that year, although Picard felt it was too early to justify such an action."

This section from the sub-heading "3.1 Tactical uses" lacks sources. I don't know the source off hand. Could someone fix it? Otherwise it should be removed. Thanks -- Captain MAJ ^=/\=|**** 19:06, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

It is from TNG: "The Neutral Zone", I just watched it yesterday. I'll add the citation. --OuroborosCobra 19:52, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Actually, when I originally wrote this it was in reference to the teaser for "Heart of Glory." The episode is sourced in the following paragraph; the two paragraphs should be read together as one unbroken passage. I don't recall them mentioning separation in the "The Neutral Zone," however. -- SmokeDetector47^{( TALK )} 00:51, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I just watched "The Neutral Zone" yesterday. Riker suggest seperating the saucer, and Picard responds that it is too soon. I think it works best where it is now. They happened in the same year as well, and the line matches almost perfect from "The Neuutral Zone". If it was written from the teaser for "Hear of Glory", why would it be laterthat year? Wouldn't it be more like later that day? ;-) --OuroborosCobra 01:11, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I hadn't read your re-write since my last comment. I have now. The "Heart of Glory" reference makes more sense now. I have re-added "The Neutral Zone" reference, I saw it last night, it was there, and deserves to be on the list as much as the "Heart of Glory" one. --OuroborosCobra 01:21, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

No warp drive on Saucer Section?

Since the saucer section has no warp drive, how could it even get to the nearest starbase in a practical amount of time? --Darth borehd 03:53, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

It couldn't. Chances are that another ship would come by, or something. I do seem to remember something from the Tech Manual about being able to maintain warp drive for a certain amount of time if it is released at warp. --OuroborosCobra ^talk 03:56, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

It is something like the driver coil assembly can channel the decaying warp field of a high warp separation allowing the saucer to come out of warp in a slow and controlled manner. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 90.221.83.112.

Starship separation

In regards to the uncited reference to starship separation, I'm pretty sure Picard stated "All hands prepare for starship separation", or something similar in Encounter at Farpoint just before the battle with Q. I'll check this later today when I get a chance. Tanky 04:08, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, now that I know where to look, I found it :P

Data says it in "Encounter at Farpoint", confirmed in script and transcript. --OuroborosCobra ^talk 04:35, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Picard, Data, same difference :P. Glad I could be of assistance. Tanky 04:45, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

TOS Saucer Separation

It is referenced that in the TOS episode "The Apple" the Constitution class can preform saucer sep. Having just watched said episode; I see no mention of this in the episode at all. The article on the Constitution class again has this reference. --PFreeman008 03:19, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

It's referring to this line by Kirk: Then use your imagination. Tie every ounce of power the ship has into the impulse engines. Discard the warp drive nacelles if you have to, and crack out of there with the main section, but get that ship out of there! The separation of the main section from the rest of the ship isn't done though, as Scotty tries something "just as dangerous."--Tim Thomason 03:27, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

That's not really saucer seperation though is it.212.74.27.54 13:55, September 3, 2010 (UTC)

Yes it is. The main section Kirk was referring to was the saucer section. From what I understand, Gene Roddenberry always intended the ship to be sep capable, but it was never done in TOS because of effects and budget limitations. leandar 14:15, September 3, 2010 (UTC)

Excelsior Seperation in Generations

The Apocrypha section of the article mentions a Seperation drill on the Excelsior in the novel of Generations, but someone over on the Fleet Ops website claims to have been through the book and found no mention of the Excelsior anywhere... Was it really mentioned? Fadm tyler (talk) 22:29, February 7, 2013 (UTC)

I've read it, and it was mentioned; it is what Sulu was doing when he learned of Kirk's death on the Enterprise-B. 31dot (talk) 22:51, February 7, 2013 (UTC)

Indeed, I too have read the novelization - the Excelsior is conducting a core breach drill, which included separating the saucer.

I should also point out the thread in question, where the user in question seems to think that they were "authorized" to remove the section, and that they "showed [us] proof".

This should hopefully work: Google books search of the novel for "Excelsior separation" - page 61 is the relevant bit. -- Michael Warren | Talk 08:10, February 9, 2013 (UTC)

I received the following email from the Je mezu24 on this issue:

Just to let you know, the reason I have made changes is because I have accurate proof that the information is false already that is being posted. I can even prove it because I have read the books that the information is supposingly from and can prove that it isn't even in there. Furthermore, these books that are in question I own and read on a regular basis.

I can clearly point out that here on Memory Alpha, Memory Beta and Memory Gamma that you got people editing pages that don't know the correct information to many of their posts and have posted false information to different sections and passing it off to be true, information that as I said I can prove is false.

I have been reading it over the years and laughing at how crazy their posts are and how un-canon and false they are to Star Trek. Memory Alpha has always been for canon stuff related to Star Trek and books aren't canon. Half the things being posted aren't canon, and I know this through talking to different producers for the Star Trek Franchise, along with the editors at Pocket Books, Marco Palmieri and Margaret Clark.

I myself have contributed to the Star Trek Community and have even talked to the editiors of the books about the problems that have occured, I am writing a Star Trek novel as well, and have been only using canon based sources and information, I've had to by pass so much here because it isn't accurate that it isn't even funny anymore.

I suggest you look at the links that DarkHorizon posted above; they clearly show the passages are in there, aside from the fact we have both witnessed them with our own eyes. 31dot (talk) 23:06, February 9, 2013 (UTC)