New kids in the class. Let's watch and discuss, Star Trek: The Next Generation

[Seppl]

Sure it does. It flies at sublight speed as well as in warp - that's done with an impulse engine. The red rectangle at the "base of the neck" - that's the engineering hull's impulse engine.

Sorry. I remembered that Riker at first did not want to separate the Enterprise in BoBW because he wanted the impulse power from the saucer section. But looking it up, he did not want to separate because he wanted the extra impulse power from the saucer section, because the saucer has an additional impulse drive.

[Peelee]

It's not just a matter of the impulse drive's acceleration, but rather a combination of mass and acceleration. A starship is several orders of magnitude more massive than a torpedo, and thus would generate a more forceful impact on collision.

F=ma. With a big enough a, m can be fairly negligible.

This is the problem with hyperspace ramming or warp ramming. If it's possible, then it is absolutely devastating and either should have been weaponized already or should immediately be weaponized on a large scale. Either way, the entire method of warfare in whatever universe it occurs in should be radically and irrevocably changed (similarly, the '09 Star Trek film managed tk largely invalidate the need for spaceships going forward in the ST universe. Abrams, as I am fond of saying, is a hack).

The problem is people are not good at conceptualizing numbers. We have certain limits, and even when we can acknowledge these limits and learn to work past them, it's still really hard to see past them. It's like the short fat glass and the tall thin glass. We instinctively think the taller one has more water because our brains aren't built to imagine the raw power of exponential increase (if you think otherwise, simple question: how many beers fit in a Frisbee? You've played with a Frisbee before, you know the rough shape and dimensions, but hey, here's a nice visual anyway. How many beers? No writing things down, no hard numbers allowed. Stop doing math. Use your head. And you will most likely be wrong, because your brain (assuming you, dear reader, are human) is simply not built for intuitively understanding that level of increase.

Or, as another example I love to use, let's say money is time. No discussion about anything other than money and time here, let's keep this forum-safe. One dollar is one second. Easy peasy. Google tells me that the richest man in the world is Elon Musk (I have my doubts, but let's not go there for a multitude of reasons). Net worth at 229.1 billion. For ease of math, let's poor him up a bit and put it at a nice, even 229. 229 billion dollars seems pretty dang rich to anyone. But the sheer extent of just how insanely rich that is doesn't hit us, because we aren't built to comprehend numbers that big. Hell, we can't really comprehend 100,000, much less 1,000,000,000, much less 200,000,000,000. Or even just how much more 200 billion is than one billion.

So, anyway, one dollar equals one second. Let's say you're a millionaire. If you earned one dollar per second to be a millionaire, you would have started with nothing roughly around last Tuesday. If you have one billion dollars? That takes you back to 1990. That's a freaking enormous difference. The joke that the difference between a million dollars and a billion dollars is about a billion dollars, that joke really hits you now, doesn't it? It's one think to know the values, it's another thing to process it in a way our brain can intuitively understand. We can understand weeks and years. The difference between a week ago and 32 years ago is about 32 years.

But wait, the ghost of Billy Mays says, theres more! That's just one simple billion. Ol' Musky has 229, remember. That puts us to.... 7,300 years ago. Fun fact! When the Roman Empire rose, the Great Pyramids of Giza were already ancient. That amount of money puts us before the pyramids were built. It is an insane amount of money that we simply cannot comprehend by simply saying "229 billion dollars". Our brains cannot process it. Hell, we can't even process 7,000 years. Even the simplified version blows past us at that point.

And FTL travel? That is way, way, way bigger numbers than anything we've mentioned here, if you want to talk about force. They'll start enormous and grow faster than you can possibly imagine, quite literally. FTL ramming is a bad idea to put into stories unless you want to build your stories around that being a major focal point.

[tomandtish]

It's not just a matter of the impulse drive's acceleration, but rather a combination of mass and acceleration. A starship is several orders of magnitude more massive than a torpedo, and thus would generate a more forceful impact on collision. Add to this the antimatter reserves on a starship, and you have a very energetic impact.

Spoiler: Spoiler for "The Doomsday Machine," TOS

Show

And as for in-universe use, I would say it goes all the way back to "The Doomsday Machine" of the Original Series, when Commodore Decker flies the Constellation into the eponymous planet eater to destroy it.

Correction: Kirk orders this, after Decker tries it with a shuttlecraft.

Mark Kloos' Frontline series has a nice bit on this.

Spoiler

Show

Enemy ships are so large and powerful that nukes barely scratch them. When cornered by one, a scientist has the idea of filling an old ship with water and ramming into theenemy at about .25c. In her words (roughly): "You're thinking about normal explosions. I want to create an astrological event that will be visible on Earth in 25 years".

Some reading I did a bit ago seems to imply that if you ran a chunk of solid steel about the size of a football into the planet, you might not destroy the planet but you'd probably kill everything on it,

[factotum]

Some reading I did a bit ago seems to imply that if you ran a chunk of solid steel about the size of a football into the planet, you might not destroy the planet but you'd probably kill everything on it,

Um, well, that would depend how fast said football was? In order to cause devastation on the sort of scale you're talking about you'd have to have it travelling pretty near lightspeed. I estimate your metal football would have a mass of approximately 50kg, so at 0.25c it would have a kinetic energy of about 140 petajoules, which is the equivalent of a 35 megaton bomb. We've exploded bombs bigger than that right here on Earth and we don't appear to be all dead just yet.

[DigoDragon]

But it does not make sense in universe. Why do they have any other weapons or use this more often?

I imagine that building starships is an expensive/time consuming endeavor. Using them as torpedoes is probably not an efficient use of resources.

It also might not always work, such as the attempt done at the beginning of the JJ Abrams Trek movie.

[Peelee]

I imagine that building starships is an expensive/time consuming endeavor. Using them as torpedoes is probably not an efficient use of resources.

I don't think anyone who uses this argument thinks "they should build more starships to waste as torpedoes. Complete with life support and windows and furniture". I think the argument is more "they should take large amounts of mass, which they have enormous amounts of and easy access to, and strap an FTL engine to them to use as torpedoes".

[factotum]

The thing is, though--ramming is totally a valid tactic in real-world naval battles. Yet pretty much no-one builds dedicated ramming ships in reality, at least not nowadays? (And back in the days when they *did* build such things, they were designed to survive the collision). So I always find it a little odd when people deploy the argument "If it was such a good tactic everyone would do it!" when that hasn't been borne out by the actions of real naval tacticians.

[Peelee]

The thing is, though--ramming is totally a valid tactic in real-world naval battles. Yet pretty much no-one builds dedicated ramming ships in reality, at least not nowadays? (And back in the days when they *did* build such things, they were designed to survive the collision). So I always find it a little odd when people deploy the argument "If it was such a good tactic everyone would do it!" when that hasn't been borne out by the actions of real naval tacticians.

Back to F=ma. Real-world naval battles don't have the a needed so they need to rely on the m, which makes it significantly less viable (still effective, sure, but less viable). Sci-fi provides the a in spades. That's the difference.

[Seppl]

The thing is, though--ramming is totally a valid tactic in real-world naval battles. Yet pretty much no-one builds dedicated ramming ships in reality, at least not nowadays? (And back in the days when they *did* build such things, they were designed to survive the collision). So I always find it a little odd when people deploy the argument "If it was such a good tactic everyone would do it!" when that hasn't been borne out by the actions of real naval tacticians.

Because in the real world there is a huge difference in range between normal weapons and ramming. You will never close the gap between two ships. Which was actually one of my points criticizing that scene in Nemesis: Were we not to pretend that the ranges are actually large and we are just given the cinematic version for the benefit of the viewership? But here this cinematic convenience was used as set up to solve the plot! Nemesis sets up both, that the ranges involved in interstellar combat are actually hundreds of meters, and that a few seconds of impulse power can overcome even the strongest shields, whereas dedicated anti-matter torpedoes (which canonically can travel at warp speeds, despite all ranges being in the hundreds of meters according to Nemesis) had virtually no effect.

This just changes everything about how war should be waged in Star Trek. All those scary unstoppable big ships? They just make a better target for ramming a unmanned rocket into it. You do not even need a warhead on that rocket, mass alone is enough. So just build plenty of small torpedoes that are just a warp drive (or even impulse is sufficient, apparently) and plenty of lead, and half of your problems are suddenly gone. Borg cube? Easy target. Whale probe? Easy target. V'Ger? Maybe need to hit it with a full starship because V'Ger is pretty big. But it's for saving the Federation, so they could probably spare one. Voyager could famously replace dozens of warp-capable shuttles even without any supplies, they cannot be that hard to build.

[DigoDragon]

I don't think anyone who uses this argument thinks "they should build more starships to waste as torpedoes. Complete with life support and windows and furniture". I think the argument is more "they should take large amounts of mass, which they have enormous amounts of and easy access to, and strap an FTL engine to them to use as torpedoes".

After having been to a couple Star Trek conventions, I've been unpleasantly surprised what people think space warfare would be like. ^^

I would say strapping engines to large asteroids would be sufficient, in agreement with your second statement, but on the other hand, such large weapons would be hard to keep hidden. Unless you start cloaking your impactors, the other side will see it coming from a distance on long range sensors and mount a defense.

I suspect that's why little weapons like antimatter torpedoes are preferable -- harder to spot and harder to shoot down before it hits.

[factotum]

Unless you start cloaking your impactors, the other side will see it coming from a distance on long range sensors and mount a defense.

Wasn't there a plot point in "The Expanse" where somebody did just that? Coated an asteroid in very non-reflective black material and fired it at Earth, the idea being they'd never spot it against the blackness of space in time to deflect it.

[KillianHawkeye]

The point being missed here is that the Enterprise view screen was destroyed and open to space (saved by a handy emergency force field), so they could only look out with the naked eye. And that Shinzon wanted to get face to face with Picard, so he brought his ship up close. That was the only reason ramming became a viable tactic, doubly so because Picard reasoned that Shinzon wouldn't expect it. It was purely an act of desperation.

Anyway, this thread is about the TV series, not the movies. We should get back to that.

[tomandtish]

Um, well, that would depend how fast said football was? In order to cause devastation on the sort of scale you're talking about you'd have to have it travelling pretty near lightspeed. I estimate your metal football would have a mass of approximately 50kg, so at 0.25c it would have a kinetic energy of about 140 petajoules, which is the equivalent of a 35 megaton bomb. We've exploded bombs bigger than that right here on Earth and we don't appear to be all dead just yet.

Was supposed to be a .9c in there. Not sure what happened.

[Peelee]

After having been to a couple Star Trek conventions, I've been unpleasantly surprised what people think space warfare would be like. ^^

I would say strapping engines to large asteroids would be sufficient, in agreement with your second statement, but on the other hand, such large weapons would be hard to keep hidden. Unless you start cloaking your impactors, the other side will see it coming from a distance on long range sensors and mount a defense.

I suspect that's why little weapons like antimatter torpedoes are preferable -- harder to spot and harder to shoot down before it hits.

A.) You don't need a particularly huge asteroid. They tend to be solid rock, and "big enough" counts. One the size of the Tantive IV could fit in a Star Destroyer bay (since the ship did, after all), and I don't think anyone would disagree that would tear through another Star Destroyer like tissue paper.
2.) What defense? Once it's moving at/past lightspeed, you're pretty much done. It's like trying to mount a defense against a bullet being fired from a gun. The best defense is "don't be in its way". Heck, they couldn't even stop an asteroid moving 2500miles per hour from crashing into a Star Destroyer. They also couldnt stop Holdo's ship, notably because it was out of range of the Star Destroyers' weapons.

Once it's established that that is a viable tactic, then that drastically changes warfare.

[factotum]

Was supposed to be a .9c in there. Not sure what happened.

Even at 0.9c I don't think it would be enough--you're talking a Lorentz factor of around 2.3, so the effective mass of your ball becomes 115kg. Kinetic energy is up to about 30 times greater than before, so a bit over 1000 megaton equivalent. The asteroid impact that killed the dinosaurs (which still didn't wipe out *all* life on Earth, note) is estimated to have been 100 million megatons of TNT equivalent, so a *lot* more powerful!

[Dire_Flumph]

Agree a football sized object (even metal) going .9c is not likely to doom a planet, but for the interested, Randall Munroe posted an interesting look on his What If? column showing the physics involved if a pitcher managed to throw a baseball at a batter at .9c. Worth a look

[DigoDragon]

A.) You don't need a particularly huge asteroid. They tend to be solid rock, and "big enough" counts. One the size of the Tantive IV could fit in a Star Destroyer bay (since the ship did, after all), and I don't think anyone would disagree that would tear through another Star Destroyer like tissue paper.
2.) What defense? Once it's moving at/past lightspeed, you're pretty much done. It's like trying to mount a defense against a bullet being fired from a gun. The best defense is "don't be in its way". Heck, they couldn't even stop an asteroid moving 2500miles per hour from crashing into a Star Destroyer. They also couldnt stop Holdo's ship, notably because it was out of range of the Star Destroyers' weapons.

Once it's established that that is a viable tactic, then that drastically changes warfare.

Sensors in Star Trek are really good; they could spot a Tantive IV-sized object coming at warp speeds. And there are episodes that show you can intercept something moving at warp speed. It's all going to depend on how soon the object is spotted.

[Peelee]

Sensors in Star Trek are really good; they could spot a Tantive IV-sized object coming at warp speeds. And there are episodes that show you can intercept something moving at warp speed. It's all going to depend on how soon the object is spotted.

Fair, but it likely depends on how far out the warp missile is launched. Presumably sensor range wouldn't matter if it was in visual range. Like how an anti Missile defense system is impressive but if a Missile is launched from a building down the street it doesn't have time to intercept.

It may not be viable in ST though

[factotum]

Sensors in Star Trek are really good; they could spot a Tantive IV-sized object coming at warp speeds. And there are episodes that show you can intercept something moving at warp speed. It's all going to depend on how soon the object is spotted.

But on the other hand, you have episodes like "The Battle" and the Picard Manoeuvre, which works because the ship's sensors only work at lightspeed and so the ship appears to be in two places at once when it does a short-range warp jump. (And the episode made it clear that this manoeuvre would have worked against the Enterprise-D because they had to come up with a defence against it). Yes, it's not terribly consistent, when is Star Trek ever that?

[DigoDragon]

Wasn't there a plot point in "The Expanse" where somebody did just that? Coated an asteroid in very non-reflective black material and fired it at Earth, the idea being they'd never spot it against the blackness of space in time to deflect it.

I've only seen the first two season of that show, so I don't know, but the idea does play into what Peelee and I are discussing; if you get your weapon up close before it's spotted, the chances of getting past defenses are much better.

But on the other hand, you have episodes like "The Battle" and the Picard Manoeuvre, which works because the ship's sensors only work at lightspeed and so the ship appears to be in two places at once when it does a short-range warp jump. (And the episode made it clear that this manoeuvre would have worked against the Enterprise-D because they had to come up with a defence against it). Yes, it's not terribly consistent, when is Star Trek ever that?

Yeah I wasn't fond of that episode for a few reasons. Dunno if there's different kind of sensors, but the best I can square this one is if the Picard Maneuver defeats short-range visual sensors (light speed) while long-range sensors work at FTL speeds over long distances.

Examples of FTL sensors are fairly plentiful. But yeah, consistency does lack in Trek.

[Velaryon]

I put the Enterprise's success vs. the Picard Maneuver down to the fact that A) they knew Picard, B) could see how obviously he was lining up to do it, and C) had someone with the reaction speed of Data to calculate where the Stargazer would come out of warp ahead of time.

It was basically the Star Trek version of Punch Out - you see the big move being telegraphed and you prepare the defense you have out of your limited options - only in this case it required superhuman reaction time which they just happened to have.

It's been long enough since I rewatched the episode that I don't remember whether circumstances actually support that reading, but that was my takeaway anyway.

[Seppl]

I put the Enterprise's success vs. the Picard Maneuver down to the fact that A) they knew Picard, B) could see how obviously he was lining up to do it, and C) had someone with the reaction speed of Data to calculate where the Stargazer would come out of warp ahead of time.

It was basically the Star Trek version of Punch Out - you see the big move being telegraphed and you prepare the defense you have out of your limited options - only in this case it required superhuman reaction time which they just happened to have.

It's been long enough since I rewatched the episode that I don't remember whether circumstances actually support that reading, but that was my takeaway anyway.

The problem with that episode is not that the Enterprise had success against the maneuver but that the maneuver should not have been any threat in the first place. The explanation for the maneuver is that it relies on the enemy not having FTL sensors. Which, for some inconceivable reason the Ferengi did not have. And Picard even knew this, despite having never encountered them before. But we can accept that, maybe the Ferengi were going cheap on sensors. The Enterprise-D on the other hand clearly has very advanced FTL sensors, they use them all the time! Then why was the Picard maneuver a threat? They even use another part of their sensor suite as a solution to the problem! What is up with those other sensors? Why do these work?

It is also kind of the same problem as with the ramming in Nemesis: If this maneuver works so well, even against the most advanced ship the Federation has, then why is this not used all the time? This only makes sense if it was a one-off strategy against an outdated Ferengi ship, but this is directly contradicted in the episode itself.

[Peelee]

It is also kind of the same problem as with the ramming in Nemesis: If this maneuver works so well, even against the most advanced ship the Federation has, then why is this not used all the time?

For that, there is a decent explanation. Once the enemy knows about this maneuver, then any time two ships appear to exist simultaneously, then the one which appeared last/suddenly appeared alongside the first is the actual target.

[Velaryon]

The problem with that episode is not that the Enterprise had success against the maneuver but that the maneuver should not have been any threat in the first place. The explanation for the maneuver is that it relies on the enemy not having FTL sensors. Which, for some inconceivable reason the Ferengi did not have. And Picard even knew this, despite having never encountered them before. But we can accept that, maybe the Ferengi were going cheap on sensors. The Enterprise-D on the other hand clearly has very advanced FTL sensors, they use them all the time! Then why was the Picard maneuver a threat? They even use another part of their sensor suite as a solution to the problem! What is up with those other sensors? Why do these work?

It is also kind of the same problem as with the ramming in Nemesis: If this maneuver works so well, even against the most advanced ship the Federation has, then why is this not used all the time? This only makes sense if it was a one-off strategy against an outdated Ferengi ship, but this is directly contradicted in the episode itself.

It still takes rapid reaction speed to figure out where the other ship will drop out of warp to fire, and the average response speed we see in most combat scenes probably wouldn't cut it as a defense. Even without the "they appear to be in two places at once" gimmick, there's still an attack originating from a different point than expected. Given the way shields and such work, this tactic shouldn't end in the destruction of the other ship that often, because if one volley was enough to blow them up then the maneuver wasn't worth doing anyway. But it still should be enough in most scenarios to cause the other ship to miss its first volley if nothing else.

Ultimately I think it falls apart less because of its tactical non-viability than because of the inconsistently-applied nature of Star Trek tech and the fact that battle scenes are driven less by being well thought-out than by a combination of budgetary limitations and a desire to emulate ship-to-ship combat from centuries ago.

[russdm]

Season 3 Episode 10
The Defector
Stardate: 43452.5

[Plot]
Data and Picard are doing a holodeck program of Henry 5, with Data doing the role. Picard comes in later, and talks to Data about the value of Shakespeare's work and also how it relates to learning/knowing about humanity. The show is cut short due to news: A Romulan ship has been picked up heading towards them in a way.

On the bridge, the crew discover the Romulan ship is being followed by a warbird. It fires on the romulan ship, and the after Picard and crew get in touch with the romulan ship, and do a shield thingy, the warbird leaves.

The romulan ship has Setal, a romulan defector. He claims to know about a plan by the romulans to invade or build a base that is important. Setal blows up his own ship, and he knows some good Klingon Curses. Worf is naturally suspicious.

Picard talks with a Black admiral guy, (who shows up again in the wounded) who tells Picard to tread carefully. Setal refuses to answer well, and later meets up with Data. Data talks with La Forge about guts, then goes to visit Setal.

Setal and Data visit the holodeck, and Setal has an awakening of sorts. Setal re-introduces himself as being Admiral Jarok. Black Admiral lets Picard know some things. Picard makes some kind of arrangement with the Klingons.

Picard confronts Jarok, who finally accepts that Jarok has become a traitor. The Crew fly off to Nelvana 3 and they go cautiously. All they find is a probe, or a source not big enough to be what Jarok was claiming.

G'Kar appears, after shooting the Enterprise. He and Picard exchange words, then 3 Klingon ships appear. With two Warbirds against the Enterprise and 3 Klingon ships, G'Kar decides that he doesn't like going out in a mutual kill, so he stands down. The Enterprise and Klingons leave.

Jarok kills himself with something that he had brought along, but left a note that he hoped would make it to his family.

[Rating]
5 - Excelent episode: Episode excels in most or all ways - major character development, good story and so on
A Hidden Gem

{Episode Commentary}
This is probably one of the best episodes of the season, and it has great storytelling. The dynamic between Picard and G'Kar, along with the character arc for Admiral Jarok is pretty good. Then there is the subtle pointers to the Klingons showing up.Then, there is the use of the Henry 5 stuff and making it relate to Picard's thinking. That was good too.

There doesn't happen to be anything bad in this episode, beyond the little hint about Jarok having brought suicide pill. It appears in a very brief shot, but doesn't really express what it was supposed to be. So it can be a little random about where the suicide pill that Jarok used came from. But if you know what to look for, you do get to see it.

So? Do fellow playgrounders agree? Disagree? Comments of your own? Get some discussing going on

Trackers)
Picard's Gifts: 1
Prime Directive Hell: 1
Q Messes with the Crew, For Laughs: 1
Doctor Who timey-wimey Destructo Enterprise Disco: 1
Klingon Rituals/Rites: 1
Poker Playing: 2
Gene Roddenberry ruins Star Trek: 4 ()
Redshirts Actually wearing a Redshirt Deaths: 1
Hidden Gems: 6
Funny Guest Star Appearances: 5 ()
Rank of Miles: Ensign, Two Gold Pips
Prime Directives: 3
Patrick Stewart Speech: 4 (Did I miss an earlier one? I don't think so)
Riker "Patrick Stewart Speech": 1
Riker Romances Something/Someone: 3
Pithy Aesops: 1
Klingon Proverbs/Beliefs/Sentiments: 1) Drink not with thine enemy; A) Several in the Episode, "Heart of Glory"; Klingons know how to deal with spies
Worfed (Worf loses to establish danger): 2
Holodeck Mishaps/Breakings/Issues: 1
Actually Alien Aliens: 1
Lore's Appearances: 1
*Data's Emotions: 3
*Troi Troubles: 1
*Money Matters: 1
Polarize the Phase Inverters: 1

[factotum]

Oh, totally agreed. I'm not sure I've actually seen Andreas Katsulas give a *bad* performance in anything, the man was an amazing actor and it's sad we lost him so soon. Put him up against Patrick Stewart and it was like a single episode acting school.

[DigoDragon]

Yeah, this episode was pretty good. It gave a decent sense of the "cold war" between the Federation and the Romulan Empire, and Picard bringing the Klingons for insurance shows just how awesome he is when planning something out.

[Olffandad]

It still takes rapid reaction speed to figure out where the other ship will drop out of warp to fire, and the average response speed we see in most combat scenes probably wouldn't cut it as a defense. Even without the "they appear to be in two places at once" gimmick, there's still an attack originating from a different point than expected. Given the way shields and such work, this tactic shouldn't end in the destruction of the other ship that often, because if one volley was enough to blow them up then the maneuver wasn't worth doing anyway. But it still should be enough in most scenarios to cause the other ship to miss its first volley if nothing else.

Ultimately I think it falls apart less because of its tactical non-viability than because of the inconsistently-applied nature of Star Trek tech and the fact that battle scenes are driven less by being well thought-out than by a combination of budgetary limitations and a desire to emulate ship-to-ship combat from centuries ago.

Starfleet or a comparable space empire could probably build a warp-powered ramship with remote control or sufficient AI to hit an enemy starship. The Dominion or the Borg could build a piloted one, they don't care about personnel losses.

Would that be more effective than a photon torpedo bombardment? A less-technological enemy probably can't stop a photon torpedo, anyway. The Enterprise, or a competent ship commander, could probably anticipate a ram attack and try to avoid it.

If you were to fling a flotilla of warp ramships against an enemy planet - say, Romulus - they may have enough space defenses to stop most attacks. Still, if you even got one ramship to strike a planet, it could cause catastrophic damage. The political fallout may be considerable, though - it could invite similar "planet-killer" attacks versus your home worlds, which would discourage most rational space empires.

[factotum]

The Dominion or the Borg could build a piloted one, they don't care about personnel losses.

Well, the Dominion are, IIRC, the only ones who we've actually seen use ramming tactics--that's how they destroyed the USS Odyssey. Although they didn't do it at warp speed!

[GloatingSwine]

Ramming at warp speed might not even be a thing.

Star Trek warp works by encasing the ship in a subspace bubble, and it isn't actually moving relative to that bubble. If that subspace bubble intersects something else the ship may just drop out of warp and impact the target at whatever realspace speed it was going at before it entered the subspace bubble or possibly be stationary and not impact at all unless the target was moving towards it or it is captured by gravity.

(Notably all combat at warp speeds takes place with photon torpedoes which can sustain their own warp bubble)

Additionally, energies in subspace interact weakly with realspace. We know that from Star Trek VI, where one of the moons of Quo'nos explodes in a way that produces a perceptible subspace shockwave many light years distant, but only causes the ozone layer of Quo'nos itself to be degraded rather than absolutely devastating the planet (as one might expect from the inverse square law).