Navigational arrayEdit

Is navigational array another term for navigational deflector? If so, perhaps the former should redirect to the latter, as navigational array does have 3 pages currently linking to it. -Intricated 03:18, 24 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. — THOR =/\= 18:47, 24 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Use of antiprotons?Edit

Would it be speculative to say that antiprotons were first introduced into deflector design with the Sovereign class? It's just that when Lt Hawk suggested shooting the Borg working on it, Picard ordered against it due to the risk of hitting the deflector, which would have been disastrous. It does seem likely that on previous starships, it may not have been much of a risk hitting the deflector as they may not have been charged with antiprotons.--Scimitar 08:46, 21 Oct 2005 (UTC)

I would not agree with that speculation. In DS9: "The Jem'Hadar" the USS Odyssey was rammed by a small ship, impacting almost directly on the Deflector Dish. The chain reaction eliminated the entire ship. This is a sign that the Deflector Dish may be particularly volitile, and anti-protons seem like a reasonable explanation.-The Jigsaw Man
The ship did notexplode the moment it was hit, and had the problem been anti-protons, that would have happened. In addition, the deflector was not where the impact occured, it was behind it. Also, we sawthat part of the problem was that pieces of the ship flew around, crashing back into it, destroying a warp nacelle. We have seen in other episodes ("Cause and Effect") that impacts on the nacelles can cause catastrophic results, like a warp core breach. --OuroborosCobra talk 02:48, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
It's been a while since i've seen the episode, (ive got in DVD somewhere) but as i recall, the dominion ship rammed just behind the deflector, and if im not mistaken, that's where the galaxy class warp core is.– 7th Tactical 03:15, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
This Divx capture appears to show the attack ship impacting directly above the nav deflector, though the area immediately behind the deflector does go boom first.
In any case, the Galaxy-class MSD shows the warp core some distance behind the deflector, roughly in the center of the secondary hull. - 00:15, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
I just watched that sequence and it appears to hit roughly in the right place to damage the main Deuterium tanks and torpedo systems, if we are to take ENT's "safety warning" on the Photonic torpedoes as canon (I do not know if it was visible and readable on screen) then all photon torpedoes are stored with their M/AM charge loaded, thus it could have been that explosion that blew up the vessel --LBraden 21:02, March 19, 2010 (UTC)
It's strange that Picard even warns against shooting the dish since 5 minutes later, he does it anyway and the ship didn't blow up like he said it would.The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).
That would be a nitpick, which we don't put in articles. Maybe he knew where he was shooting.--31dot 02:10, January 3, 2012 (UTC)

Constellation classEdit

The article says the Constellation-class doesn't have a deflector.. I always thought that's what that dark opening at the front of the saucer was? Or is that a shuttlebay? Skold 06:26, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

It would seem to be a logical rule that _every_ Federation Starship would need a navigational deflector in order to fly. Therefore, the Constellation-class of Federation Starships must have a navi-deflector _somewhere_, even if there is no specific canonical reference to it.
This article needs at least one good image capture of the close-up on the Enterprise-E's navi-deflector dish assembly, as seen during the "space walk" in the feature film "First Contact". Such an image (or images?) would reveal extreme close-up details of what this technology looks like. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).
USS Stargazer

Constellation class

  • "Although the navigational deflector is absent from the Miranda-, Constellation- and Soyuz-classes..."
If the Constellation-class starships don't have deflectors, then what is that thing at the very front of the saucer section?

EDIT: Sorry, I didn't earlier notice that there was already a section on the Constellation-class...

--NME 19:56, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Looks a lot more like cargo or shuttle bay. --OuroborosCobra talk 20:07, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Constitution class Edit

Anyone know why the Constitution had an Orange Deflector, which switched to blue? The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

The Constitution-class began life with a fully extended gold metallic deflector. By the films, the deflector was pushed into the hull and covered with blue lights. The deflector was still "orange" (actually gold), but the gold coloring was not seen clearly because of the blue lighting. Oh, and it had to do with technological advancements. --From Andoria with Love 00:00, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

I meant right before it left spacedock it Star Trek I. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

Andrew Probert's original intention was for the deflector to emit a dull red-orange glow at low velocities, transitioning to the familiar brilliant bluish-white as the ship accelerated; unfortunately, the effect doesn't appear to have been used consistently. See question 19 from the interview here
Actually, I'm not even sure the deflector on the Connie refit was ever shown completely powered down. - 00:15, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Merge suggestion from Talk:AE-35Edit

I suggest merging this with deflector dish, since it's part of that system. There's nothing more to say about this unit and would probably fit better as part of the overall description of the Ent-E's deflector. --From Andoria with Love 23:47, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree, merge but leave as a redirect. - Adm. Enzo Aquarius...I'm listening 23:53, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Sovereign class Edit

Removed the segment: "The deflector used on Sovereign-class starships is charged with antiprotons. This proved to be a potential hazard as particle weapons fire hitting the deflector could destroy much of the ship. (Star Trek: First Contact)" While it's true that the deflector was charged with anti-protons while the Borg were modifying it, we do not know whether this is normal. It's possible that the Borg charged the deflector with anti-protons once they gained access to deflector control. Unless someone can provide a quote or screencap from Insurrection or Nemesis showing that the Sovereign-class deflectors are always charged with anti-protons, this segment simply is not accurate. --NME 01:53, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

The note should be re-added but rewritten to state that it was charged with antiprotons during the Borg's modification. --From Andoria with Love 19:08, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I added in a reworded version. Is it acceptable? -- NME 23:01, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Perfect. :) --From Andoria with Love 23:12, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Idle deflector of Galaxy-class? Edit

Is there a picture of an idle deflector (i.e. shut down)? I wonder if this blue glow is persistant or what color might be in its place when the deflector is powered off. I need this information for painting a model of the ship. Thank you all in advance! 16:44, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

How about this one? -Mdettweiler 16:57, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
Perfect! Even with idle warp-pylons and bussard-collectors. Thank you so much, buddy! 16:42, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Removed Edit

Although the navigational deflector is apparently absent from the Miranda-, Constellation- and Soyuz-classes, presumably a deflector or something approximating its functionality is still present, albeit not visible. This can be assumed for non-Federation vessels without an apparent deflector as well, as otherwise they would not be capable of traveling at warp.

This statement isn't even necessary as not all ships are designed the same. — Morder (talk) 05:44, December 20, 2009 (UTC)

Galaxy Class, saucer deflector arrayEdit

On the bottom side of the saucer, there are four big windows in a row, facing forward. On a filesheet of the galaxy class they are named "saucer deflector array", so they are apparently no windows. Does anybody know, how this deflector array is illuminated when activated? I saw some pictures where they were plain white like normal windows. Is this genuine? Or do they glow blue like the main deflector dish? Thank you in advance! 23:50, February 10, 2010 (UTC)

Such diagram sheets can tend to be rather inaccurate, especially if they aren't from official sources. They tend to have things on them that were made up for the purpose of the diagram, which weren't taken into account when the episodes were being made. In this case, there have been no references whatsoever to a Galaxy class saucer section deflector array in canon; the only one we know of is the one on the secondary hull. -Mdettweiler 05:29, February 11, 2010 (UTC)
The windows are Picard's quarters, the windows above are Ten Forward the saucer deflector is in between as part of a sensor array that runs almost round the whole ship. This is in the Blueprints and technical manuel. It's seen on screen in 'The Child' just before the scene where Guinan helps Wesley. Lt.Lovett (talk) 10:12, August 20, 2013 (UTC)
According to STTNG Tech Manual page 9, 88, the four squares in front and under the phaser array are the saucer deflector array. And there are indeed times when they are dark and when they are glowing blue. But it seems like there is no real pattern to it when they are on and when off. According to the Manual they are sometimes used as backup, but really necessary only when the ship is separated. --Pseudohuman (talk) 10:47, August 20, 2013 (UTC)

Attack on the Odyssey Edit

Isn't it conjectural to say that the damage to the navigational deflector resulted in the destruction of the ship? On the same account, could you not say that the proximity of the collision to the warp core/antimatter chambers caused the ship's destruction.

Better yet is the comment at all necessary? Scimitar 15:08, June 12, 2011 (UTC)

The comment could probably be reworded to simply say that the deflector was damaged before the ship was destroyed, since it was shown. I think you're correct though that we don't know the chain reaction started there.--31dot 20:33, June 12, 2011 (UTC)
If I remember correctly, the starboard nacelle was badly damaged as well, and we know that can destroy a ship, since that Enterprise-D was destroyed several times with just a "glancing blow" to the nacelle. - Archduk3 20:57, June 12, 2011 (UTC)

Main Sensor Edit

The schematic for the NCC-1700, which is seen in "Datalore", identified the deflector as the main sensor. I included this in the main body as an alternate name for the deflector. It has been removed by Pseudohuman. Can we accept "main sensor" as an alternate name for the deflector?Throwback (talk) 22:30, September 29, 2012 (UTC)

It is a combined system, the main duotronic sensor combined with a navigational deflector, that is all this pic by Franz Joseph re-establishes to me, as is apparent from this more detailed schematic by Joseph for example. [1] Just as warp nacelles have a bussard collector in them, doesn't mean bussard collector is the alternative term for warp nacelles. --Pseudohuman (talk) 23:24, September 29, 2012 (UTC)

New Trek Edit

JJ Abrams Enterpise doesn't seem to have navigational deflector. It just warped into the wrecks in vulcan orbit. The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

That doesn't mean it didn't have one, as there is clearly one on the engineering hull. Perhaps it is not effective against large chunks of debris. Ships have been in debris fields before. 31dot (talk) 20:22, May 4, 2013 (UTC)
Also they usually seem to have to specifically program and fire the deflector beam when they try to use it to deflect anything larger than space dust and micrometeors. --Pseudohuman (talk) 22:09, May 4, 2013 (UTC)

vs. Shields Edit

I feel there's a lot of confused cross-over between the navigational deflector and main shields (those that go up with Yellow Alert, used in combat, etc.)

The navigational deflector, as I've always understood is, is supposed to be strictly about protecting the hull from space dust and other things that would hit a ship on a constant basis.

Shields, though maybe based on a similar principle, will for larger scale protection and so were usually offline.

In Voyager's Year of Hell we see a micrometeoroid storm endanger the ship only because the navigational deflector was offline. Normally a ship wouldn't even shrug at them since the deflector would always be active. 19:46, March 18, 2014 (UTC)

Do you mean the article is confusing or are you just making a general point? --| TrekFan Open a channel 20:11, March 18, 2014 (UTC)