More pictures Edit

Why not simply add some pictures of Galaxy class, Defiant class, etc.. My phylosofy is you can't give to much information. Let the readers compare the reactors to each other. Maybe we could even write a small section explaining the differences between several warp engines, by telling of the evolution of the warpcore. -- Redge 23:31, 4 Aug 2004 (CEST)

Enterprise NX Edit

"Cold Front" gives a general "walk through" of how the Enterprise's warp reactor works, however I am not versed well enough in this area to incorporate it accurately. --Gvsualan 10:45, 13 Mar 2005 (GMT)

Removed Edit

Exactly why a warp core is refered to as a gravimetric field displacement manifold is unclear since warp drive has nothing to do with gravitons or manipulating gravimetric fields.

I removed this line -- when in Star Trek have they ever specified that warp drive doesn't involve any particular area of physics? Sounds like a line from a show does not match this person's own personal, non-canon view of how warp drive works. -- Captain Mike K. Barteltalk 16:04, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

In Star Trek: The Motion Picture Montgomery Scott called it a "Simulator."

This was actually in reference to Scott and his assistant running a simulator on whether or not the warp drive was properly balanced or whatever, and wasn't in reference to the name of the drive. --Alan del Beccio 19:40, 2 Jan 2006 (UTC)

'Gravimetric field displacement' may refer to the way in which the warp core creates a subspace field allowing faster than light travel. Geordi indicates that wrapping a low level subspace field around a mass reduces it's gravitational constant, defying real world physics. By 'displacing' normal space, the ship exists in a bubble not affected by relativistic limits on speed. -- Anonymous 6:05, 26 Jun 2010 (NST)

TAS Constitution-class Warp Core Edit

er... Isn't the animated series non-canon? -- 19:22, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)

  • On MA we do consider the animated series as canon, but much of the information gathered from it should be taken with a grain of salt. Also, please register a user name. Its quick and easy, and we dont require any information, not even an e-mail adress. Jaz 19:53, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)

In what episode of TAS did we see the Warp Core pictured on this page? --AC84 19:59, 14 March 2006 (PST)

Warpcore waste Edit

i remember a VOY episode when they mention toxic leftovers from the warpcore reactions. i dont remember exacly what was said but it migth be worth adding(?)

I've seen every VOY episode and i don't remember them giving any specifics on what is created by the reactor. Although, I seem to remember a TNG episode in which Trilithium resin was mentioned as being a by-product of a matter-antimatter reactor. Trilithium is a highly toxic and explosive compound which can be used as a biogenic weapon.

Season 5 ep 1 "Night" of VOY... Torres talks about how they are able to turn their waste into something useful. The episode where they meet the Malons for the first time.

Reaction in magnetic field? Edit

The actual matter-antimatter reaction occurs in a magnetic field in order to prevent uncontrolled contact with matter, which could cause a massive explosion that would severely damage, or even destroy, the ship.

I removed this line as it contradicts another line in the article, and my own understanding, that the reaction takes place in dilithium crystals. I guess it could be both, but we should get a citation if it was ever stated that the reaction takes place in a magnetic field. 9er 18:53, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, it is not entirely wrong. The reaction does take place inside of a magnetic field as such because the magnetic field keeps the matter and antimatter in place when they are reacting with the dilithium crystal. Think of it as how heavy water is used to control the reaction in a nuclear reactor. It's a similar function. It simply helps control the reaction. George.e.pierson (talk) 15:00, February 9, 2016 (UTC)

Spare Core Edit

I remember that somewhere in voyaer there was mention of a spare warp core that could be assembled, is this real?- 7th Tactical

I am unsure where the information comes from, but I believe it's speculation based upon the Master systems display of Voyager, which shows a second warp core-like object behind the main warp core. Some have speculated that that core can be used for parts for the main core, but I think this is all speculation. - V. Adm. Enzo Aquarius 00:54, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Intrepid class MSD

Warp core-like object near the shuttlebay.

Even if they had a spare at some point, they definitely didn't anymore by the time of "Day of Honor". -- Kingfisher 01:06, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
There is currently an auction of some original concept art on ebay, which shows a "Spare Warp Core" STAR TREK VOYAGER Ship Status Panel LCARS. The second picture shows it in Zoom. - [Guest:Vado] 15:46, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Shutdown Edit

I was watching The Haunting of Deck Twelve, and I saw them literally turn off the warp core of Voyager. Does anyone know if there's a precedent in Star Trek of a starship deliberately doing that, or is this the first time that a NON-emergency warp core shutdown happened on screen? Thanks. --Gaeamil 20:09, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Uh, yeah. "Galaxy's Child" Kassorlae 20:23, January 8, 2010 (UTC)
Also TOS: "The Naked Time". Technically that was an emergency, but the person who shut down the reactors did so for no real reason at all, leading to an emergency. I should note that the impulse engines were also shut down in this episode. I do realize that the question was asked nearly nine years ago. There is a possibility that it was done in TOS: "Balance of Terror" as well, as they shut down many systems in an attempt to hide from the Romulan's sensors. Likely this would include the warp core, as I would expect it produces sizeable emissions (the problem would be powering it up so quickly though).
ВорЧа (talk) 14:24, April 24, 2017 (UTC)

Tellurium Edit

in one episode of voyager (when belonna and uvok are locked up (i think it is called resistance)) reference is made to of tellurium controlling the reaction or something, should this be mentioned? 14:58, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't see why not, though it sounds like ti might be better suited for the matter-antimatter reaction assembly article. And who are "belonna" and "uvok"? :) --From Andoria with Love 17:38, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Warp core miniaturisation Edit

Seeing all the different warp cores i see that they are quite big. i would also assume that the delta flyer's warp core is quite small. bit just how small can a warp core get? The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

We aren't warp engineers. --OuroborosCobra talk 23:12, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Agreed. But you also have warp-capable probes that are quite small - if i recall correctly, photon torpedoes are also warp-capable. — Morder 23:19, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure how much is stated in canon on that. According to the TM, they are only equipped with "warp sustainer engines," capable of carrying off a warp field from a parent vessel launching it at warp, but not capable of making its own or creating one if it drops out of warp. --OuroborosCobra talk 23:34, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Recycling Edit

Did the Voyager set reuse parts of the TMP warp core? -- 08:21, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Considering an almost 20 year gap I'd have to say the answer is no. — Morder 13:10, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Why not? It's pretty clear from the auctions that they kept this stuff around. --OuroborosCobra talk 19:14, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Because it's a large set and I assumed he was talking about the larger aspects of the set and not something small or easily stored parts as most sets are destroyed after filming movies. — Morder 19:25, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Well I'm really just talking about the warp core itself, specifically the silvery part at the junction of the upper and lower decks. -- 02:23, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Star Trek 2009 Warp Core(s)? Edit

So from seeing the movie, it seems as if the warp core is either multiple cores or one core made up of multiple chambers/parts. Any thoughts?

If you're referring to the new look of Engineering section, that seems to me to be more of an aesthetic choice to make Engineering look more like a real life Engineering. If you're referring to them "ejecting the warp core", I believe all of those pieces were the antimatter containment pods.IndyK1ng 06:01, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Vertical vs Horizontal Core Edit

Warp cores appeared as vertical since ST-TMP, however warp reactors [sic] were horizontal in ENT. Is there any evidence in TOS as to which way the Constitution warp core was orientated? My interpretation is that Engineering is located in front of the core, and it is the big structure behind the grille, aligned along the axis of engineering hull. Engineering would thus be just behind the deflector, and the core would terminate just in front of the shuttlebay. It would certainly explain why the hull had a cylindrical shape, and why it had a barrel shape after the refit (extended downwards to fit the new core in). An advantage of the new arrangement might be that it is possible to eject the core (a bit hard to do so through the shuttlebay or deflector) so it might be a safety feature.--Indefatigable 00:52, 20 May 2009 (UTC)


You need to add pictures of the Warp core from the most recent movie.Compaq (talk) 02:13, June 1, 2013 (UTC)

There needs to be pictures available for us to add (legally) 31dot (talk) 02:17, June 1, 2013 (UTC)

Check this out. Compaq (talk) 05:24, June 1, 2013 (UTC)

Incomplete Edit

Per article, DS9: "The Visitor" has some important additions for this article so I placed the pna-incomplete tag at the top. Tom (talk) 00:28, January 25, 2016 (UTC)

TOS Constitution Class Warp Core Edit

This page currently has an image captioned as a "Constitution Class Warp Core" however I believe it is in error and is part the impulse engines. I recommend its removal from this page. Here is the image in question: 18:49, April 23, 2017 (UTC)

This is Main Engineering from the first season. Although Franz Josef's Blueprints from 1975 have it in the saucer it is not canon. It is in the engineering hull according to Doug Drexler's schematic seen in ENT: "In a Mirror, Darkly" Pt II. It is the Warp Engine Room.Those are warp plasma conduits to the warp engines according to the schematic and accepted canon.

This pic of Main Engineering from 2267-2269 should be added since it was the version most used in the series second and third seasons.


This pic of TAS vertical engine core from 2269-2271 should be added since it's considered canon.


I've removed some bits from the article that were poorly sourced and contain a lot of speculation. These can be re-added if the speculation is proven to not be specuation.

This system enabeled the dilithium energized plasma from the M/ARA to be drlivered to the warp engines for use.


By 2270, most Federation warp cores were redesigned to consist of a large warp core unit in the secondary hull with matter (deuterium stored or from bussard collectors) and antimatter(stored in the antimatter pods) being injected into the core intermix chamber vertical conduits, with the resulting energy directed to the dilithium crystal energizer to be charged for use through a horizontal conduit leading out from the rear of the core to twin warp plasma conduits delivering dilithium energized plasma to the warp engines through the engine pylons. (Star Trek: The Motion Picture) The dilithium crystal energizer assembly was modified to be located in a radiation shielded room in main engineering in a later upgrade in the 2280s. (TWOK)The crystal energizer assembly was previously not seen in this newer desigh and must have been located in an area other than Main Engineering. Perhaps the deck below(TMP) The upper section of the vertical core was used to connect the M/ARA directly to the impulse drive urilizing an impulse engine deflection crystal in similar designs from the late 23rd century. Also main phaser banks drew power from the warp reactor or core to increase power. (TMP)

I've slimmed that second paragraph down to what was there before and simply stated. -- sulfur (talk) 11:21, January 13, 2018 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-NC unless otherwise noted.