Well, if there was a door big enough for the Enterprise-D, we can always pretend there was one big enough for the Excelsior, too.
Funny, when I visited the Paramount Studios back in 1988 Andrew Probert confronted me with the E-D / spacedock scaling issue and asked "Can you believe this [crap]?"
My reply was the same as yours and courteous as he is he politely replied "Maybe I can live with that". I took a look at his E-D schematic in front of Earth Spacedock and feel today that we definitely need a bigger Spacedock to make this work.
Does anyone recall what Shane Johnson decided the height of the engineering decks in the refit Enterprise was? I believe he utilized a partial cutaway drawing by Mr. Probert (and perhaps indeed received the gospel from him directly.)
You might want to get in touch with Andrew Probert. Back then I also brought up Shane Johnson and this was Mr. Probert's reaction: "Oh, Shane
Looks to me like the guys at ILM solely focused how to make the spacedoors match the size of the Enterprise
for entry and exit - and forgot to make it big enough for the Excelsior
, too (maybe there was a bigger one elsewhere for Excelsior
but she merely blasted the small space door wider Enemy Mine
style to pursue Enterprise
Is there a possibility ILM deliberately "fixed" their mistake in the size comparison chart?
And what does a scale comparison of Excelsior's
bridge, saucer rim and saucer ventral array with those features on the Enterprise
engineering hull windows I'd rather find these unreliable to use these as a means to conclude the actual size from.
Apparently these could be the infamous "lower decks" (lower deck
And though I detest the bunk bed BS featured in ST VI, I wouldn't exclude the possibility these might be tall rooms / decks.