The Trek BBS

The Trek BBS (http://www.trekbbs.com/index.php)
-   Trek Tech (http://www.trekbbs.com/forumdisplay.php?f=14)
-   -   Enterprise-C Bridge Layout (http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=198928)

Bry_Sinclair January 2 2013 09:39 AM

Enterprise-C Bridge Layout
 
Something has just come to mind concerning the Bridge layout and positions aboard the Enterprise-C.

In "Yesturday's Enterprise", Castillo was constantly referred to as the Helm Officer (rather than Conn from TNG time), so would that mean that there is a separate Navigation Officer? Or rather that the posts have been merged into one but the old terminology still remains?

It seems a little odd to have a Navigator as well as a Operations Officer, as much of the sensor work and that the Navigator did would go to Ops instead. Since there was never a Comm Officer mentioned I think its safe to assume that that position has since been removed in favour of Ops.

Also, regarding the Bridge's actually layout. When Tasha comes aboard, she takes the forward console to the Captain's left (Ops on the E-D) which must be Tactical. When the BoP attacks, Castillo takes the console next to her, so that could be Helm. Then there is the console in front of those two, the function of which was never explained.

Anyone got any thoughts?

Timo January 2 2013 10:21 AM

Re: Enterprise-C Bridge Layout
 
Since the forwardmost console, covered in rubble, is in practice the classic Helm/Navigation console from the TOS movies, it would seem natural to assign it this very role on the E-C as well.

The two TNG-style pulpits have every excuse of being, say, Tactical and Executive. The bridge of the Hathaway featured such a standalone pulpit for XO Worf, after all, and all later starships have featured a special seat for the XO somewhere close to the CO - but the E-C has no other position for the XO.

FWIW, all three pulpits featured a single corpse in the movie era jumpsuit (a second one at the forward console might in theory have been left outside our view, or the associated corpse for the putative second position at that console might have been thrown clear - indeed, might have been Lt Castillo, eventually found in that general direction). Only the CO seat was occupied by a person in a commissioned officer jacket. Should we deduce that the three forward pulpits were all of reduced importance; that all the commissioned officers normally crewing them had become casualties early on; or that the jumpsuits are valid clothing for commissioned officers, just like the DS9 jumpsuits are valid for commissioned officers from the era where others wear the TNG style? I'm sort of leaning towards the last one, seeing as to how Captain Picard in his ST:NEM photograph is seen wearing the full black-collared jumpsuit attire (not the red-collared one that backstage sources associate with cadets) at some unspecified early date in his career.

Timo Saloniemi

Blip January 2 2013 01:31 PM

Re: Enterprise-C Bridge Layout
 
Bearing in mind the purpose with which those jumpsuits were designed for TWOK, not to mention how unreliable NEM should probably be considered, I'm leery of using them as "officer jumpsuits".

I have no problem with considering the two consoles to be an amalgam of helm/nav on one side plus tactical on the other; and then the forward console could be just about anything -- after all, the rear console on the Ent-B looked like a helm/nav station, but we know it wasn't ;) I'm inclined to think of it simply as a multipurpose station reconfigurable for "guest civvie of the week" to make use of.

(FWIW though, I usually consider the set we saw to be an auxiliary control centre -- since to be quite frank, it was cr^p! I much prefer seanr's CGI take on the main bridge, although sadly he's never gotten round to finishing it)

Mark_Nguyen January 2 2013 01:44 PM

Re: Enterprise-C Bridge Layout
 
Well, the Stargazer was lost eleven years after the E-C, and her center console featured prominent lettering for "HELM" and "NAV" for the two seats. So either at the time that class of ship, or ships in general had positions as such, or Picard didn't bother to relabel the seats...

Mark

King Daniel Into Darkness January 2 2013 02:35 PM

Re: Enterprise-C Bridge Layout
 
The Enterprise-C bridge always fascinated me. It was so utilitarian compared to any prior (or subsequent) Enterprise command centre. Add to that the reused TOS movie Space Mountie uniforms (minus belt and turtleneck) and Wrath of Khan phasers, and it always makes me envision an era where Starfleet was dealing with extreme budget cuts.

As for the consoles, I doubt those preparing the set gave much thought to their functions. They just arranged a few generic consoles on their standard guest ship set. If that far forward console was meant to be manned, it'd block the view of the screen.

Or maybe the bridge is supposed to be far bigger than the actual set? Imagine those rear consoles and upper level continuing all the way around. It'd be huge. A giant TNG/STXI-sized viewscreen wouldn't be so hampered by one or two crew at the far forward station so much as the Ent-D battle bridge viewer would.

Timo January 2 2013 03:56 PM

Re: Enterprise-C Bridge Layout
 
Quote:

Bearing in mind the purpose with which those jumpsuits were designed for TWOK, not to mention how unreliable NEM should probably be considered, I'm leery of using them as "officer jumpsuits".
The TOS movies never were that consistent with the uniforms to begin with - and every TV show era has featured parallel jumpsuits and "classier" uniforms for officers... The jumpsuits also being worn by the enlisted.

Quote:

Well, the Stargazer was lost eleven years after the E-C, and her center console featured prominent lettering for "HELM" and "NAV" for the two seats. So either at the time that class of ship, or ships in general had positions as such
Or then this particular ship from the Constellation class was behind the times, while sister ships such as the Hathaway had already received the newer blue-green graphics and the occasional TNG style control pulpit about the same time the E-C was built (refitted?) with such features.

We have seen a great variety of Miranda bridges, with different styles of graphics (among the newer being Sisko's Saratoga, with the Brattain representing intriguing middle ground). Ships from classes already on their way to retirement might skip refits if they are particularly decrepit individuals to start with. Or perhaps exceptionally well aged ones, in such good condition that they don't need a refit to survive the last fifteen years of the career of the class, whereas sister ships have to be modernized if they are to see service until that retirement date...

Quote:

an era where Starfleet was dealing with extreme budget cuts.
Or slowly edging towards the austere shapes and vast open spaces of the TNG era...

If anything, the late TNG and DS9 eras represented budget cuts, with cramped spaces full of exposed machinery. :)

Quote:

If that far forward console was meant to be manned, it'd block the view of the screen.
What screen? I doubt the set actually had one (as the director avoided those shooting angles like plague). The ship, in-universe, may have had a screen that would be easily visible from the CO's throne - or at most blocked to a degree equal to Kirk's TOS screen.

Quote:

Or maybe the bridge is supposed to be far bigger than the actual set? Imagine those rear consoles and upper level continuing all the way around. It'd be huge.
I do like that idea a lot. The bridge dome is, well, a dome in classic TOS and TOS movie style, and TOS bridges did tend to be circular, in-universe, until the Constellation class introduced the cropped forward part.

Timo Saloniemi

Blip January 2 2013 04:41 PM

Re: Enterprise-C Bridge Layout
 
I think you may be misinterpreting the intent of subsequent series - not to mention their own lack of consistency. For example, you referred previously to the TNG and DS9 costumes being worn simultaneously. This is true, but the DS9 coveralls were never intended or shown as being primarily for enlisted use -- and neither were the 'formal' TNG unis intended solely for officers. The closest you'll get to that is the use of S1-3 spandex uniforms for background extras during the early switch to the newer style during that series. That was merely a real-life cost consideration... Furthermore the original dept-coloured overalls seen in TNG were used by officers and enlisted alike, as necessary.

I'd say out of all the sources, the TOS movies were the most consistent; at least until that embarassing SNAFU over Valeris in TUC.

Assuming the forward console would prohibit the view somewhat, this is why I tend to think of it as a standing-only station, designed for a specialist to lecture the regular cast about spatial-anomaly-of-the-week; or possibly even to be used by the main cast in conjunction with an overly-large viewscreen as a sort of early "astrometrics" station.

(regardless, it's JUST THE BATTLE BRIDGE, I TELL YA!) :D

Timo January 2 2013 05:02 PM

Re: Enterprise-C Bridge Layout
 
Quote:

This is true, but the DS9 coveralls were never intended or shown as being primarily for enlisted use -- and neither were the 'formal' TNG unis intended solely for officers.
And the result was that they weren't "primarily" used by anybody, and we are forced to accept that Starfleet intended them to be worn in a mixed manner.

But while the TOS movie coveralls had some offscreen intent behind them, this intent did not have any decisive onscreen result. It did not manage to establish that only enlisteds (and enlisted trainees, and perhaps cadets) could wear the coveralls, because how do you establish something like that? The audience might simply be failing to see those hundreds of officers who wear the thing, because they wear it outside the movies the audience sees and the camera records.

So the TOS movie intent really counts for nothing. Even ST2, which is supposed to introduce the whole uniform system, makes a mess of who is a cadet and who is not. Spock supposedly trains cadets, and Spock supposedly trains Saavik, but Saavik is never addressed as Cadet and wears the officer tunic with commissioned Lieutenant insignia. So, are the jumpsuit people the cadets? Peter Preston is addressed as Midshipman, but while wearing the (red-collared) heavy protective suit, and we never see him in a regular jumpsuit.

Timo Saloniemi

Bry_Sinclair January 2 2013 05:12 PM

Re: Enterprise-C Bridge Layout
 
Quote:

Blip wrote: (Post 7476811)
(FWIW though, I usually consider the set we saw to be an auxiliary control centre -- since to be quite frank, it was cr^p! I much prefer seanr's CGI take on the main bridge, although sadly he's never gotten round to finishing it)

Are there any images of that Bridge around? I'd love to have a looksee.

I'm thinking I might do a little bit of retconning, and alter the Bridge slightly and just say that is how it was meant to be. I do agree though the set used was pretty poor.

As for the uniforms, the jumpsuit were always used for enlisted crew so that how I will continue to see them. As for NEM, I take it with a handful of salt--with so many errors its had to really take seriously.

Timo January 2 2013 05:40 PM

Re: Enterprise-C Bridge Layout
 
I'm not sure I understand what was poor about the set. It was graphics-heavy, interestingly lit, full of classic Wrath of Khan props, had an ambitious aft ramp imitating that of the E-D, and was really littered with furniture (but of a pretty consistent style) in comparison with all the other TNG guest bridges.

Something like the Brattain bridge I could easily see as "poor", because it had cheap-looking flat plywood walls basking in unflattering illumination, limited graphics and detail, and the only thing really going for it, the complicated layout, did not appear particularly functional or sensible. But the E-C seems like a lot of effort went into her, both workmanshipwise and in terms of conceptualizing.

Timo Saloniemi

Galileo7 January 2 2013 08:28 PM

Re: Enterprise-C Bridge Layout
 
^Agree.

Mark_Nguyen January 2 2013 09:32 PM

Re: Enterprise-C Bridge Layout
 
Bry: here, under "Bridgs_Ambassador" - http://www.webolutionary.com/truespa...ry/seanr/temp/

I see the E-C bridge as presented as acceptable - it shares a similar minimalist layout as the E-D bridge, with three aft stations, CO, plus two (or four if you believe that the forward console is manned - I'm not one of those :P) forward stations. All that's missing is flanking chairs for the CO and a tactical rail. Also, the Stargazer and Hathaway (and Lantree, if you want to go that far) had similar minimalist bridges. Hathaway is literally the same set piece, too.

Mark

Ronald Held January 2 2013 10:01 PM

Re: Enterprise-C Bridge Layout
 
Was the intent to have the E-C bridge be between the C and D in evolutionary design, or take after another ship's class design? Also was the C one of the first ships constructed?

Timo January 2 2013 10:08 PM

Re: Enterprise-C Bridge Layout
 
Quote:

Hathaway is literally the same set piece, too.
...But with exciting asymmetry. What do you think that emergency ladder pillar thingamabob was all about? Something that would descend from the ceiling for purposes of evacuation or maintenance, and be neatly stowed away in all but the most derelict ships? An intruder control system designed to knock out people who would assume the main entry door would be unobstructed?

There's one TNG pulpit up on the central pedestal, next to the CO chair, and one down to port, only barely glimpsed. Would there be another to starboard, perhaps? And how big is the viewscreen, with our heroes looking rather high up at it in some scenes, but down from Riker's eye level in others?

Quote:

Also was the C one of the first ships constructed?
She sports the hemispherical ramscoops also witnessed on USS Excalibur (because of stock footage reuse) but not on USS Zhukov. She also has a slightly differently positioned saucer, apparently because the stagehands or whomever weren't able to put the model back together properly after first disassembly. So if we believe in the (somewhat disputable) registries of these other two vessels, we can see the Enterprise is a closer match to the one with the lower registry, designwise. So, yes, quite possibly one of the first ships of the class constructed!

Timo Saloniemi

Blip January 3 2013 01:25 PM

Re: Enterprise-C Bridge Layout
 
Quote:

Timo wrote: (Post 7477261)
Quote:

This is true, but the DS9 coveralls were never intended or shown as being primarily for enlisted use -- and neither were the 'formal' TNG unis intended solely for officers.
And the result was that they weren't "primarily" used by anybody, and we are forced to accept that Starfleet intended them to be worn in a mixed manner.

No, that was the production intent. The DS9 unis were created specifically as part of the "rougher, tougher" edge-of-the-frontier feel of the show. It was not some sort of unintentional result as you infer.

Quote:

But while the TOS movie coveralls had some offscreen intent behind them, this intent did not have any decisive onscreen result. It did not manage to establish that only enlisteds (and enlisted trainees, and perhaps cadets) could wear the coveralls, because how do you establish something like that? The audience might simply be failing to see those hundreds of officers who wear the thing, because they wear it outside the movies the audience sees and the camera records.
Let me get this straight: You refuted my comment on the original production intent (which is documented) on the basis that it was offscreen. And then you conjecture that hundreds of officers may be wearing enlisted jumpsuits offscreen, but we 'never saw them' to validate your viewpoint? Do you see what's wrong with that?? :cardie:

Quote:

So the TOS movie intent really counts for nothing. Even ST2, which is supposed to introduce the whole uniform system, makes a mess of who is a cadet and who is not. Spock supposedly trains cadets, and Spock supposedly trains Saavik, but Saavik is never addressed as Cadet and wears the officer tunic with commissioned Lieutenant insignia. So, are the jumpsuit people the cadets? Peter Preston is addressed as Midshipman, but while wearing the (red-collared) heavy protective suit, and we never see him in a regular jumpsuit.

Timo Saloniemi
The generally accepted thought on this is that Saavik was a pre-graduated Lt, who if I'm not mistaken had returned to the Academy for command training. Why else do you think she was taking the Kobayashi Maru test?

The element of the uniform which denotes being a cadet is the bright red department undertunic, for both enlisted and officer cadets. Normal enlisted crewmembers wear a black undertunic, while officers of course have the appropriate dept colour.

Whether Preston has a regular jumpsuit or not is completely besides the point - he was in engineering, of course he had an environmental suit on! Again, you note he wears a red-collar engineering suit. This is because he's a cadet. Regular personnel feature a black collared suit.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:59 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.