View Single Post
Old January 5 2009, 04:06 AM   #89
Shaw
Commodore
 
Shaw's Avatar
 
Location: Twin Cities
Re: If You Could Re-Imagine the Constitution-Class Refit...

Captain Robert April wrote:
We could place some of the blame on Franz Joseph and that first set of blueprints. If he hadn't started the ball rolling on the fill-in-the-blanks game, we wouldn't have had Messrs. Sternbach, Probert, Okuda, etc., coming back to "correct" things (I'm not blaming Roddenberry for this one; his desire to distance himself from FJ's works only gave Rick, Andrew, and the rest license to lay down some stuff that I suspect had been bugging them for a while, just like they'd been bugging me, for roughly the same period of time).

Of course, while we're at it, we can pin some of this on Matt Jefferies, since a lot of what Probert and Sternbach laid out was started with Jefferies' Phase II notions, like a very definite central warp core down in the secondary hull that nobody with a working cerebral cortex could ever mistake for the impulse engines up in the saucer.
All true... and it is problem for all of us really. How many people today assume that they know how communicators work because we have cell phones. That is as much an attempt to tie current technology to items as anything done in the 70's, 80's and 90's.

Of course it is one thing for fans to play the how does that work game... I'm just suggesting that people making SciFi should avoid this trap.



CuttingEdge100 wrote:
The internal structure of the model is not necessarily an accurate depiction of the internal structure of the fictitious vessel it is to represent.
I wasn't suggesting it was... but the model imposed that limitation. Plus the model wasn't originally design to be lit from within. The internal lighting was added later, and there were wires running along the exterior of the model to power those lights.

But the model was what we were given.

Yeah, but the saucer can seperate and in such case you'd want to have some things with you in that situation...
Some things... sure. But you are already pretty bad off if you are separating the saucer, which is an action of last resort.

Only one time was that alternative brought up in TOS. On the other hand, the Enterprise engines were damaged beyond repair stranding the Enterprise in space for months. For the crew, life went on.

Well there were shuttlecraft and spacesuits... so there were means to get outside the ship and live. I still think conditions would be better in the ship though.
I hope this is you being facetious... if you really need an explanation of the difference then this conversation will be reaching an end very quickly.

Then how come in Star Trek TMP they weren't there?
Last I checked, TMP isn't TOS.

But I would point out that the TMP corridors would fit within the existing space for the TOS corridors, so maybe they needed more of that open space for the upgrade.

But TMP is Post-TOS so I really don't care what they did or why.



ancient wrote:
My problem with the balcony-on-the-rim idea is that the window arrangement doesn't look at all unified. As if each window group leads into several different rooms rather than a lounge. I mean, why make such a disorganized window arrangement if they're all leading to a big lounge? They're different sizes and shapes, and not really lined up at all.
Originally there were only a row of (painted on) windows in those locations. The additional lower window and miscellaneous port holes (if they are also windows) were added to the model later to increase the detailing.

I've already decided to do the ship's interior in the pilot version, and consider additional modifications (to the final production version) as things that would have been done with some other justification in mind.

Why add the lower window? Maybe for dignitaries to get a better view out of the ship. Why add the port holes? Maybe they are sensors rather than port holes. After thought modifications to pre-existing designs rarely look clean and organized.

The smaller size works ok, but the 1080 size works so much better.
I don't begrudge those who wish to make it easier for themselves. But I'm not sure it solves the problem of the placement of these windows. As long as you are changing the ship's dimensions, changing their positions isn't going to make that much more difference either. As CuttingEdge100 suggested, just move them a little.

By it's nature, making the ship slightly bigger makes it easier to get all the components in there without having to comprimise as much - like having a half-deck at the saucer rim. That seems so...strange to me.
Well, I never suggested a half-deck, so that idea seems strange to me too. Fortunately the rim is a little more than 21 feet thick in my last study of the 11 foot model's primary hull (apparently no one actually measures anything I put up), so the deck height on the rim of deck 6 isn't drastically different from anywhere else.



CuttingEdge100 wrote:
ancient wrote:
My problem with the balcony-on-the-rim idea is that the window arrangement doesn't look at all unified.
I'd have to agree.
Which is why it is great that everyone can do their own designs.

Originally I was going to put nothing there at all... and then I realized that nothing there at all was the most workable solution, so I put the lounge (an open space) there.

But I'd be happy to entertain any ideas for a solution that doesn't require changing the dimensions of the ship or moving the position of those windows. Anyone up for that challenge?
Shaw is offline   Reply With Quote