View Single Post
Old August 17 2013, 11:43 PM   #296
Robert Comsol
Robert Comsol's Avatar
Location: USS Berlin
Re: Kirk's Television Enterprise Deck Plans WIP

Praetor wrote: View Post
Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
The Jefferies’ cross section / JCS (illustration above):

I’ve mentioned before that I believe there is sufficient evidence that the ship’s internal description was an early concept for one of the pilot film versions (still including a physical Main Deck 2). The text description mentions 11 main decks and 16 engineering decks.
To be clear, do you mean you think the drawing reflects a smaller Enterprise, the kind that would've had 203 crew members? In turn, the text version represents the "real" size of the Enterprise settled on after the pilots but still fairly early on in production?
Allow me try a chronology of events what I think happened
  1. IIRC, the "203 lives" reflected a much smaller ship from an earlier draft. After they had built the ship to reflect the change in size, they unfortunately forgot to boost crew complement accordingly in the final screenplay
  2. Already for pilot "The Cage" they used the occasion to describe the early and basic internal layout and fix the vessel's size, based on the size of the studio set bridge in relation to the top of the VFX model. Odd: No deck location provided for the transporter room/s, but the concept of saucer separation other than for emergencies only. Could indicate a certain uneasyness whether to really go for the transporter system solution or saucer landing (a la Forbidden Planet).
  3. After the regular series has been green-lighted Matt Jefferies takes the time to do his JCS (which he probably wouldn't have done just for either of the pilots. Why go through the hazzle of doing a cutaway for either of the pilots but the series is rejected?). He realizes that the studio set height doesn't allow for 11 decks in the saucer hull and reduces the number of decks in the JCS. Scriptwriters remain unaware of the change and go by the original text description, therefore
  4. "Errand of Mercy" features visible impacts on Decks 10 and 11
Praetor wrote: View Post
Regarding the "lowering" of the bridge module, here's where I apply the salt. We "know" to an extent that this was done to upsize the ship from a 203 crew vessel to a 430 crew vessel. I choose to, frankly, ignore the dome alteration for this reason. The bridge previously sat higher in a different dome, if you want, but I don't consider it to have any bearing on deck two.
The opening shot onto the transparent bridge in "The Cage" settled the correct size.
Briefing Room # 1 from "The Cage" was located on Deck 3 (still Deck 4 in my current draft). Was converted into the "Briefing Lounge" of WNM (now, actually a recreation or officers' lounge) because Astro-Labs on Deck 2 had been converted into the conference lounge aka Briefing Room # 2 (with a nice panoramic window ahead, but because of the camera angle in WNM we never got a chance to see it behind Kirk's chair...).
When Deck 2 was removed the new conference lounge was removed, too, and a room inside the ship became Briefing Room 2 (often seen in TOS).

If we don't assume that Main Deck 2 had been removed for the regular series (obviously one deck was removed when the bridge module was lowered...), it is impossible to rationalize the long turbo lift ride Spock and the Romulan commander embarked upon in "The Enterprise Incident".

When Spock said "Deck 2" the ship's computer immediately understood he was referring to Engineering Deck 2 because no other "Deck 2" was left on the ship.

Praetor wrote: View Post
I suppose, also, it matters whether the sensor platforms are "decks." Reading this, it sounds like you think that the bridge dome is the reason why there were more decks, and Jefferies revised this number downward when the bridge dome was enshrinkened? Jefferies' Phase II Enterprise cross section may bear scrutiny here, as it was mostly intended to represent the same ship, albeit with changed engine pods and bridge.
For the Phase II cross section he eliminated one more main deck (compared to JCS) and there were only 8 left. It's somewhat odd if you look at the actual result, since the lower deck heights on the TMP Enterprise now allow for 11 main decks while in contrast we have less engineering decks (judging by the window positioning on the engineering hull).

McCOY: I know engineers. They love to change things.

Praetor wrote: View Post
Just to throw a monkey wrench in, this was something put together, I believe, by aridas sofia many years ago that makes too much sense:

While I love the visualization of the studio set inside the saucer (tells me I still got plenty of work ahead on Deck 6),
do I detect an ironic undertone in your comment? There should be two engine rooms in the saucer and therefore the warp engine room is misaligned.

Praetor wrote: View Post
I'd urge you to not feel too beholden to these "other" rooms, especially if you're going for a true Jefferies-level vision.
"Would Matt have approved" is the constant question that runs through my mind. To avoid any misunderstandings: I'm confident that he did not approve a circular corridor in the engineering hull and wanted the end of the Jefferies Tube corridor to feature a turbo lift (to the Bridge). Unfortunately he was overruled by the directors and/or producers and what ended up on film is something different but canon nevertheless (looks like a fate both Enterprise creators had to endure ).

Praetor wrote: View Post
Regarding the cathedrals, I'd also urge you to approach them consistently. That is, if you decide they are forced perspective or not, use them that way in all locations they appear. I have seen others not do so, and in my opinion it is selective thinking at best.
I think I understand exactly what you mean because that issue has caused me considerable headaches.

From a production point-of-view I have no doubt that it was meant to be a forced perspective and in real life would be long and parallel. This is what I reproduced on Main Deck 7 and Engineering Deck 9.
On E-Deck 12 however, the forced-perspective-taken-literally works much, much better with the main sensor-deflector components.

I'm inclined to feature only one engine room in the engineering hull (i.e. E-Deck 12, would be quite a paradigm shift, wouldn't it? ) but that would raise problems to rationalize the turbo lift rides in "Ultimate Computer" and "By Any Other Name" and Janice would need new quarters on E-Deck 12.

Praetor wrote: View Post
Surely there must be some form of ejectable component for the crew's safety, even if it's just a main chamber and fuel cells.
Although according to Scotty "the miracle worker" it was him who made the jettison scenario possible in the first place:

SCOTT: I've sealed off the aft end of the service crawlway, and I've positioned explosive separator charges to blast me clear of the ship if I rupture the magnetic bottle.

IMHO, it should read: I've been sealed in the service crawlway, and I've activated explosive separator charges to blast me clear of the ship if I rupture the magnetic bottle.

I think he really and often exaggerates too much.

"The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth" Jean-Luc Picard
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
Albert Einstein
Robert Comsol is offline   Reply With Quote