View Single Post
Old October 7 2013, 05:33 PM   #316
Praetor
Vice Admiral
 
Praetor's Avatar
 
Location: The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Praetor wrote: View Post
I'm not interested in addressing the Abramsverse ships, really, at all. I also don't need them for my purposes.
Since I seem to be the only one who IS, I'll add that to my "pet projects" queue.
I think you should sir. No disrespect meant to the new films or anything, I just literally don't care for this particular project. I think it'll muddy the waters when they're already plenty muddy.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
From that analysis, however (inspired by King Daniel among others) I'm getting into the idea that there's no reason for the decks on starships to actually be continuous; and that a considerable bit of space may exist between them, which would actually explain the undercut for the saucer pretty nicely. That would mean some of the rooms/modules/compartments situated on those decks would have a bit of wiggle room for how they fit into the ship; a conference room might have a ten-foot ceiling while crew quarters are only eight, corridors are only seven, etc.

That might account for the lack of lineup between windows and deck spaces, especially if one assumes that some "plubming paths" built into the ship require parts of the deck to be raised or lowered to accommodate them.
While I do like this notion, the thing that I find it hard to account for, particularly with the notion of decks of totally different heights, is when the corridor sets of say, engineering, are seen to have the same heights as the corridors leading to the transporter room. Having stuff between decks is easier to rectify. But then, of course, depending how much stock you put in the MSDs seen on screen for other starships I'm not calling much into question, we have kind of seen that there's not much space between decks.

Shrug.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
The Excelsior model actually was scaled much larger than has been generally accepted, as I think I've proven. I'm following the logical conclusion of that to see what other classes scaled to match would be like.
I'm not sure that it matters, considering how rarely the other classes appear in the same frame with the Excelsior (and then only in DS9, which has widespread scaling issues of its own).

In this entire process, though, try to remember that length isn't nearly as important as volume. The JJ-prize, for example, is VOLUMETRICALLY about as large as an Ambassador class starship while even a 622 meter Excelsior would be about 2/3rds of that.
Good point. Still, an upsized Enterprise has certain virtues, or at least I think it does, which is part of why I'm trying to flesh it out. And of course in upsizing it, you have to upsize anything that uses its parts, too.

blssdwlf wrote: View Post
Mytran wrote: View Post
Regarding the issues with the E-refit, maybe the decks in the secondary hull are simply a little taller? At the very least we know that the ceiling height for Main Engineering is 12'
Agreed. The deck above main engineering and 5 decks below it are 12' tall based on the engineering scenes. The cargo bay scene also corroborates a 12' deck height going further back.
I'm actually going forward with this notion, and carrying it 'backwards' to the TOS version. I'm trying to maintain as much consistency between the two for reasons I'll make plain soon.

Workbee wrote: View Post
Wow! Been away for a while. Love the discussion here. Great work as always Praetor.

I recently visited the USS Iowa down her in Long Beach and I have to concur. It isn't practical or even realistic to expect that all decks have the same height. Ships, unlike high rise buildings, are constructed around function requirements that apartment complexes, office buildings or even luxury cruise ships are not subject to. My take is, (and it looks like this has already been adopted) let the windows help inform the deck spacing, rather than try to impose a constant deck spacing throughout the ship and trying to squeeze the windows in.

WB
Thanks, WB and I'm starting to think you're right. If I'm really going to do this from a window approach with Excelsior, perhaps I'm beholden to do the same with the other ships.

Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
Analogies to 20th Century warships have been presented here. What about luxury cruise ships? Do these have the same issues? (I consider the Enterprise to be a ship somewhere between both extremes).

Regarding the TOS Enterprise the Making of Star Trek said there are 16 engineering decks and according to my preliminary examinations these would match perfectly with the exterior windows and assuming an average height of 10'. However, the deck floor is noticably thicker on the center deck (or flight deck level).

Praetor, considering there is not that much space in the connecting dorsal of the TOS Enterprise these windows would beg for explanation assuming your deck lining were accurate.

Bob
Those neck windows have always struck me as kind of odd. It almost seems like the designers wanted to get the secondary hull as far away from the primary as possible, and given the essentially "wasted" space of the neck, decided to dedicate it to observation lounges...

B.J. wrote: View Post
I'd say yes, they do have the same issues, especially when you're in the "working areas" of the ship. Sure, most of the passenger areas have a constant deck floor, but even then, the deck heights vary quite a bit. Starfleet ships wouldn't need to cater to too many passengers, as most people aboard them are part of the crew and are there to work.
True. Perhaps I'll revisit this whole thing just a bit.
__________________
"If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross; but it's not for the timid." - Q
Praetor is offline   Reply With Quote