I'd also like to add my admiration for your work so far Shaw - and that the missing nacelle allows a very nice look at the shape of the pylon. I had no idea it was so organic and flowing.
Funny you should bring that up, because this is one of the biggest differences between this model and the studio model. And it is also one of the best illustrations of why building this model has been so helpful in my research.
Back in 2007 when I was first looking at the plans I assumed that the nacelle support pylons were flat. And it looks like Price/Loos made the same assumptions when building the studio model. But as I looked closer at the drawings Jefferies had made I saw the sorta wing like cross section I had overlooked before.
Similarly, I had thought (like Price/Loos) that the dorsal pylon edge had a bend in it just before reaching the phaser assembly (which was changed to the torpedo assembly for TMP). Actually, there isn't a bend at all, there is a thin sharp edge support bridging the gap. And this makes sense because the phaser assembly is actually only as thick as the widest part of the dorsal.
Because Jefferies wasn't easily accessible during the construction, and the fact that he packed a ton of information into a relatively small area (a significant amount of the one-to-one scale plans for the 5' 4" studio model were on a single 24" x 36" sheet), some of this stuff was missed. Still, the studio model was a very good representation of Jefferies final design. I had noticed during one set of progress images that I had caught an angle similar to that taken of the studio model under construction, and even though I've been favoring Jefferies' design, the two looked quite similar.
Here is a comparison I did of the Phase II dorsal (with the vertical edge) with the TMP dorsal.
Much of this I had missed when I was just looking at the plans. When I started having to figure out how to build what was on the page, these details started to pop out at me.
But yeah, I like the more organic feel of the cross section of Jefferies' dorsal and support pylons. It might not be something that would have been that noticeable (when compared to how the studio model was being built), but it shows how much thought Jefferies was putting into this design.
Now I seem to remember one of Jeffries TMP sketches showing what looked to be a small impulse deck at the aft base of the saucer support dorsal.
Now you are making a pho-torp tube that can be added on the front or left off at one's discretion. I wonder if you could test mount it on the back too.
Yeah, early on Jefferies tried out a number of ideas (including extending the base of the dorsal along the spine of the secondary hull and having the nacelle supports attach to it).
The problem is that the dorsal has the same wing like cross section as the nacelle support pylons (thick and rounded in the front narrow and squared off along the back) and the assembly also intersects the secondary hull, so getting it to just fit from the front has been a challenge.