View Single Post
Old September 18 2013, 08:10 PM   #177
Shaw's Avatar
Location: Twin Cities
Re: Photo request -- Enterprise hangar deck studio miniature

Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
Here is the basic Jefferies cross-section in color (schematic display on bridge). IMHO it's the different colors that make all the difference how to approximate a correct interpretation of Jefferies' black & white cross-section.
A quick review of the history of the Enterprise design…

Roddenberry had started Jefferies out designing a smaller version of the Enterprise at the end of the summer of 1964. Jefferies had put a ton of work into both plans for the miniatures and graphics that would end up on the bridge displays.

In mid October of 1964 Roddenbery changed his mind and asked for the Enterprise to be bigger (and have some more details). This had Jefferies scrambling just to finish the plans for the miniatures, and actually forced Datin to start construction on the 33 inch model using the plans for the smaller scale Enterprise with notations written on them of what not to build so he could get started.

The final plans of the Enterprise at the new scale were finished on November 7, 1964, after Datin had farmed out the construction of some of the parts for the 33 inch model… which is why the contours of the 33 inch model differ from the 11 foot model.

But the graphics on the bridge remained unchanged in The Cage and were never updated for the series. And they didn't need to be. Early in production people were watching the finished product as 35mm film, by the time they got to see what Star Trek looked like on actual TV sets they realized that they didn't need to worry as much about the smaller details. The turbolift graphic is one from before the Enterprise was rescaled, and wasn't intended to do anything other than sorta show where the bridge was and how it connected to the rest of the Enterprise via a turbolift.

The only cross section that Jefferies released was a small drawing (drawn on an 8.5 x 11 sheet) for the writers guides. And as MGagen pointed out, it matches up pretty nicely with what he drew for Phase II…

blssdwlf wrote: View Post
Question about the Phase 2 drawing - why is the distance between the 442 and 450 marks greater than the 450 and 478 marks at the bottom?
The 450 mark was misplaced… the other two are correct.
Shaw is offline   Reply With Quote