RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,649
Posts: 5,428,466
Members: 24,810
Currently online: 584
Newest member: Damix

TrekToday headlines

Trek Messenger Bag
By: T'Bonz on Sep 18

Star Trek Live In Concert In Australia
By: T'Bonz on Sep 18

IDW Publishing December Trek Comics
By: T'Bonz on Sep 17

September Loot Crate Features Trek Surprise
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

USS Enterprise Miniature Out For Refit
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

Star Trek/Planet of the Apes Comic Crossover
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

Trek 3 Shooting Next Spring?
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

Star Trek: Alien Domain Game Announced
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Red Shirt Diaries Episode Three
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Made Out Of Mudd Photonovel
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Fandom > Fan Art

Fan Art Post your Trek fan art here, including hobby models and collectibles.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old July 6 2009, 01:27 PM   #106
Saquist
Commodore
 
Location: Starbase Houston
Re: WIP - TMP Enterprise, deck by deck

I personally haven't done a comparison to the film from here but I tell you it's unlikely the two levels could fit in there but I don't know the internal volume we're dealing with. CTM could give an idea.
Saquist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 6 2009, 02:15 PM   #107
CTM
Lieutenant Commander
 
CTM's Avatar
 
Location: The exact center of my universe
Re: WIP - TMP Enterprise, deck by deck

if you will note in this picture:

I have included a "pass through" to the deck above the torpedo bays that is definitively inside the neck. Certainly I could have implemented this as a single bay with a deck above, but we have a clear indication in TWOK that there are two bays. My choice is either to make one bay, or to make the two bays smaller than seen. Neither is a great choice. I said all along that some things just were not going to fit as seen on screen. If you can figure out a way to make it fit, more power to you. This is the compromise I made. Others could be made. A logical design would have been yet a third (or fourth) option. Certainly the design as seen in TWOK is not as efficient a design as it could have been.
CTM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 6 2009, 04:23 PM   #108
judge alba
senior street judge
 
judge alba's Avatar
 
Location: mega city 1
Re: WIP - TMP Enterprise, deck by deck

only just found this thread and have to admit what your doing CTM is bloody good
__________________
Swift as the wind.
Gentle as a forest.
Fierce as fire.
Firm as a mountain.
Strike as powerful as thunder.
judge alba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 6 2009, 05:01 PM   #109
DiamondJoe
Ensign
 
Re: WIP - TMP Enterprise, deck by deck

Don't get me wrong - I think this is fantastic, really, and I can't wait to see it all.

However I think that having 2 bays is more unworkable than 1. There's the size issue, of course, but also with your pass-through, the level above opens with a circular railing balcony overlooking the bay. I think if there were 2 bays, what you would see would be a half-circle, as the other half would overlook the other bay.

As I said I think the only realistic solution to this is to move engineering and the intermix chamber further back. Although we have Mr Probert's drawing, and Shane Johnson's deck plans, I think that what we see on-screen has to be the guide. There is no on-screen evidence that main engineering is at the extreme forward of the secondary hull, or that the chamber is mounted between the torpedo tubes, or that the chamber connects to the impulse crystal (or even if it is a crystal) and much logical evidence to suggest that none of these things are true. The existence of the corridor leading out of engineering would indicate that it must be located further back to allow for its passage.

It would be interesting to hear Mr Probert's thoughts on this...
DiamondJoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 6 2009, 11:28 PM   #110
Saquist
Commodore
 
Location: Starbase Houston
Re: WIP - TMP Enterprise, deck by deck

CTM,

The One Bay Option could allow for what we see in the movie so that beyond the inner tube doors the route splits into the tube one and two. I believe that's one of your options you've pointed out.

Diamond Joe. I disagree with your position on moving the Engineering Section.
Engineering is exactly at the juction between the Neck and the PTS and of Course directly bellow the deflection crystal of the impuse engines. Engineering as to be where it is.

In my opinion the most important thing isn't what we see in the Movie. It's the Plans themselves. Unless you're truely forced to change things because of an error in the design (Which happens all the time with 2D schematics ) then leave it alone. The designs were made in retrospective to other elements that aren't immediately seen. If you start changing things that are superflous just for how they look it may screw you in the end.

Like my guys say: Cut to fit/Paint to Match
Saquist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 6 2009, 11:41 PM   #111
Cary L. Brown
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Austin, Texas
Re: WIP - TMP Enterprise, deck by deck

There are certainly issues with the TMP-era ship design. If you read the entire thread, you'll find that CTM is well aware of those.

That said... the idea of it "being too small" isn't the right answer. The size was established before the internal sets were designed, or laid out, much less built.

There are numerous "issues" with sets and props and SFX and you name it. But it's possible to keep the "spirit" of those, and even the look of those, without losing their functionality entirely.

The torpedo rooms may seem small, compared to what you think you saw on-screen. But really, are they? Remember... all the set "really" is, is a corridor with a railing-floor covering a track, a couple of consoles, and room to stand along either side of the track.

Is there any reason that the set seen in TWOK couldn't be "scaled down" slightly? It's a common practice, both in Trek and in filmmaking in general, to make sets larger or smaller than the REAL WORLD things they're supposed to represent (movie "Oval Office" sets are typically larger than the real thing, for example... and let's not even talk about movie "airliner interior" sets!)

So, which scene from TWOK would be impossible if the rooms are slightly smaller than "as filmed?"

They're not THAT much smaller. Not really. This ship is bigger than you're probably thinking.

CTM... if you could add a "human-sized" element to that scene, even if only momentarily, that might help people to envision what you're trying to do here.
Cary L. Brown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 7 2009, 01:53 AM   #112
CTM
Lieutenant Commander
 
CTM's Avatar
 
Location: The exact center of my universe
Re: WIP - TMP Enterprise, deck by deck

Cary L. Brown wrote: View Post
CTM... if you could add a "human-sized" element to that scene, even if only momentarily, that might help people to envision what you're trying to do here.

Done. I don't have time to do anything more elaborate or detailed tonight, but the figure in this scene is approximately a 6-foot tall "man" (yes, I know it is primitive boxes ). It is a little smaller than the Photorp Bay shown in TWOK, but not by much.
CTM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 7 2009, 09:20 AM   #113
DiamondJoe
Ensign
 
Re: WIP - TMP Enterprise, deck by deck

Saquist

I disagree that the deck plans should be considered totally canon, and I think that what is seen on-screen should be. For one thing, none of the deck plans of the refit Enterprise that are floating around on the internet have ever been seen on-screen (unlike the plans for the Enterprise D or E, which are prominintly featured on various displays). They are simply suppositions made for fun. And yes, I'm aware that this is too (and I think its a hell of a job) but I don't see how you can get around the fact that there is a corridor that leads out of the engine room, which if the room is where you say it is, simply cannot exist. It has to be further back.

The guy in the bay does give a good idea of scale - thanks. I still feel that there has to be only one bay, though, and that as suggested the launch track splits into 2 tubes at the end. If you look at the end of the inspection in Trek 2, and the funeral scene, there is actually a fair amount of space in there - it doesn't seem particularly cramped.

Still - its all for fun and ultimately as you say there probably isn't a perfect solution. The one I would personally go with would be something like the one below, which someone else has already suggested. This way you fit engineering in nicely, the corridor matches and you free up space in the torpedo bay. The only slight issue, as far as I can see, would be that the bottom of the intermix chamber sits over the arboretum. However who says there actually is an arboretum there? We've never seen it and the windows glow blue. Wouldn't they be green? And isn't it slightly odd to have a garden deep in the engineering section of a ship where space is at a premium?
DiamondJoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 7 2009, 12:38 PM   #114
CTM
Lieutenant Commander
 
CTM's Avatar
 
Location: The exact center of my universe
Re: WIP - TMP Enterprise, deck by deck

DiamondJoe wrote: View Post
Saquist

I disagree that the deck plans should be considered totally canon, and I think that what is seen on-screen should be. For one thing, none of the deck plans of the refit Enterprise that are floating around on the internet have ever been seen on-screen (unlike the plans for the Enterprise D or E, which are prominintly featured on various displays). They are simply suppositions made for fun. And yes, I'm aware that this is too (and I think its a hell of a job) but I don't see how you can get around the fact that there is a corridor that leads out of the engine room, which if the room is where you say it is, simply cannot exist. It has to be further back.

The guy in the bay does give a good idea of scale - thanks. I still feel that there has to be only one bay, though, and that as suggested the launch track splits into 2 tubes at the end. If you look at the end of the inspection in Trek 2, and the funeral scene, there is actually a fair amount of space in there - it doesn't seem particularly cramped.

Still - its all for fun and ultimately as you say there probably isn't a perfect solution. The one I would personally go with would be something like the one below, which someone else has already suggested. This way you fit engineering in nicely, the corridor matches and you free up space in the torpedo bay. The only slight issue, as far as I can see, would be that the bottom of the intermix chamber sits over the arboretum. However who says there actually is an arboretum there? We've never seen it and the windows glow blue. Wouldn't they be green? And isn't it slightly odd to have a garden deep in the engineering section of a ship where space is at a premium?
I very seriously considered going with that, but if you look at Probert's intentions in this drawing http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/File...rprise_cut.jpg you can clearly see the botanical section defined, as well as the intermix chamber running straight between the impulse deck and the bottom of the secondary hull. Were I designing this ship from scratch, that is one of the many things I would change. The intent of the design team is clear, therefore I will attempt to match it as closely as possible.
CTM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 7 2009, 05:36 PM   #115
Cary L. Brown
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Austin, Texas
Re: WIP - TMP Enterprise, deck by deck

DiamondJoe wrote: View Post
I disagree that the deck plans should be considered totally canon, and I think that what is seen on-screen should be. For one thing, none of the deck plans of the refit Enterprise that are floating around on the internet have ever been seen on-screen (unlike the plans for the Enterprise D or E, which are prominintly featured on various displays).
No they weren't... there have never been "D" or "E" deckplans shown on-screen. The only "official deckplan set" for TNG came out after the series was over. (A better set was never truly released, by the way, but can be found on the 'net and makes, to me at least, a lot more sense than the one we got from Pocket.) There are, as far as I'm aware, no "deck plans" for the "E" anyplace.

The only "deck plans" that have ever seen screen time have been the FJ deckplans... which don't match the real TOS ship as seen on-screen anyway.
They are simply suppositions made for fun. And yes, I'm aware that this is too (and I think its a hell of a job)
That's not entirely true. Yes, it's being done as a "hobby" rather than to develop a real, buildable starship. (At least as far as we know!)

But it's not "just for fun." Trust me, I know... if it was "just for fun," in that sense, you could put anything anywhere, and not worry about trying to match up with anything, nor trying to apply logic.

My point is that this is as much a technical exercise as it is recreation. How do you reconcile totally contradictory evidence? What aspects are IMPORTANT, and what aspects can you afford to "wink and nod" at?

Ultimately, what you have to keep is anything which, if different, would change the context of what was seen on-screen. What you can afford to "tweak" is anything which can be justified as a "production mistake" or "production compromise."

For instance, the re-use of an existing set (the Klingon bridge) for making a torpedo room set is a "production compromise."
but I don't see how you can get around the fact that there is a corridor that leads out of the engine room, which if the room is where you say it is, simply cannot exist. It has to be further back.
Not true. You only have to change how long that corridor is. Instead of being 20 feet long, it becomes ten feet...

A more likely "compromise" from the original designer intent, I suspect, is the deck on which main engineering is located. It's quite clear that the intent is for the two angled "upwards" shafts at the end of the horizontal intermix chamber are supposed to be firing directly up the pylons, without any "jog" or interruption. I suspect, however, that the location we've been given by Andrew's original layout precludes that from being possible. Then, there's also that TWOK "drop-down door" which is also impossible if the engineering set is at the very spine of the engineering hull. Ultimately, engineering MUST be lower, I suspect.

But that's not so much based upon "it looks like this on-screen" as it is based upon "this is how the parts fit together most logically."

Your argument about that forward-leading corridor... seen ONLY ONCE, IN THE BACKGROUND, during TMP... is something that has no bearing on the storytelling whatsoever. If it doesn't fit, and everything else does... logic demands that that detail be the one which is "compromised" on, doesn't it?

The DESIGN INTENT was that the horizontal shaft run aft from the vertical shaft, and then branch to run up both pylons. The DESIGN INTENT was that the vertical shaft run from the base of the secondary hull, directly vertically, to the impulse deflection crystal.

Don't believe me? Check this out:
http://probertdesigns.com/Folder_DES..._MenuPAGE.html
The guy in the bay does give a good idea of scale - thanks. I still feel that there has to be only one bay, though, and that as suggested the launch track splits into 2 tubes at the end. If you look at the end of the inspection in Trek 2, and the funeral scene, there is actually a fair amount of space in there - it doesn't seem particularly cramped.
You've made your point. CTM has considered the issue and made his own choice. You, of course, are welcome to do your own version and implement it any way you wish, as are all of us. That's really the fun part anyway.

EDIT: While I strongly recommend browsing Andrew's entire site, in order to save confusion among those who don't want to look "everywhere," here's the relevant image, on this page:

http://probertdesigns.com/Folder_DESIGN/CargoBay-3.html

Looking at that, you can see that there IS room to move the engine room down a deck, without impacting anything significantly.

Last edited by Cary L. Brown; July 7 2009 at 07:05 PM.
Cary L. Brown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 7 2009, 06:39 PM   #116
DiamondJoe
Ensign
 
Re: WIP - TMP Enterprise, deck by deck

The Enterprise D cutaway could be seen in main engineering (during 'Generations' for example, when the Duras sisters view it via Geordi's visor). I think (although I could be wrong) that the E cutaway was displayed at the rear of the bridge.

That corridor is not only featured in TMP. During Khan's first phaser strike we see the cadets fleeing engineering and some of them exit through that door and out through the corridor. And I don't think there's even ten feet to spare there. And even if it is only seen twice - well, its still there, isn't it, no matter how many times you see it? And my argument isn't really about storytelling - its about the reconciliation with what is seen on-screen (ie, canonical Trek) with the technical realisation and design of the ship from a practical standpoint. I have seen Mr Probert's drawing and I appreciate that was the design intent. My point is that the intent doesn't mesh with canon, and concepts are simply that - concepts. Not final realisations.

I hadn't considered that drop-down door in engineering, and yes I think you're right - engineering must be lower down. And I'm sure I can't be the first to mention this, but how does that door manage to slice straight though the horizontal intermix chamber?

I wish I had the ability to do my own version! Unfortunately I do not possess the skills that CTM does or the necessary hardware. I think his version is terrific, but I just find that to shrink the torp bay by that much and to ignore an on-screen feature such as that corridor deviates a bit much from canon. Can't wait to see the finished ship though.
DiamondJoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 7 2009, 06:46 PM   #117
CTM
Lieutenant Commander
 
CTM's Avatar
 
Location: The exact center of my universe
Re: WIP - TMP Enterprise, deck by deck

DiamondJoe wrote: View Post
I wish I had the ability to do my own version! Unfortunately I do not possess the skills that CTM does or the necessary hardware. I think his version is terrific, but I just find that to shrink the torp bay by that much and to ignore an on-screen feature such as that corridor deviates a bit much from canon. Can't wait to see the finished ship though.

Which Canon are you adhering to? What was seen inside, or what was seen outside? What was seen inside won't fit in many cases (not just the ones we are discussing just this moment) in what was seen outside (another good example is the Rec Dec which will not fit in the saucer the way it is shown on screen). Want to label the actual ship seen on screen as canon-violation? When canon conflicts, you chose one, the other, or some compromise that allows both - even if neither fits exactly as seen.
CTM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 7 2009, 10:09 PM   #118
DiamondJoe
Ensign
 
Re: WIP - TMP Enterprise, deck by deck

Yeah I agree there's plenty of in-film mistakes. The rec dec is a great example - simply far too big. And your take is a really good compromise, as they do have to be made. I simply say (for the last time, I promise, as I'm probably starting to sound like a stuck record) that to have two torp bays is more unfeasible than one, and that main engineering should be further back, and slightly lower.

Anyway - I'll say no more on the issue, and simply look forward to seeing the finished article.
DiamondJoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 7 2009, 10:22 PM   #119
Herkimer Jitty
Rear Admiral
 
Herkimer Jitty's Avatar
 
Location: Dayglow, New California Republic
Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Herkimer Jitty
Re: WIP - TMP Enterprise, deck by deck

Yeah, totally unfeasible considering that we saw a torp bay blow up and not long later saw a clean, intact torp bay at the funeral.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1965-1965½, 1966-1969, Jan. 21-23 1972, 1979-2005, 2009-?
Herkimer Jitty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 7 2009, 10:24 PM   #120
Cary L. Brown
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Austin, Texas
Re: WIP - TMP Enterprise, deck by deck

DiamondJoe wrote: View Post
The Enterprise D cutaway could be seen in main engineering (during 'Generations' for example, when the Duras sisters view it via Geordi's visor). I think (although I could be wrong) that the E cutaway was displayed at the rear of the bridge.
Ah, I see your error.

You're assuming that because someone did a "cross-section view" that this is either (a) accurate to what we see on screen, or (b) means that there are "deck plans" associated with it.

Neither is true.

In fact, for a great example of this look at DS9, and the Defiant. There are multiple versions of the "cross section" (what we call the "MSD" for "master situation display") Depending on which version you look at, the ship is a different number of decks thick. Does this mean that the ship "grew" a few decks during it's life? Nahhhh...
That corridor is not only featured in TMP. During Khan's first phaser strike we see the cadets fleeing engineering and some of them exit through that door and out through the corridor. And I don't think there's even ten feet to spare there.
All we REALLY see is cadets running out of the damaged area. Whether the corridor continues forward by some distance, or if it's a short "T" and they're fleeing to either side, ultimately, has no impact on the scene, and virtually nobody who didn't freeze-frame that sequence frame-by-frame would notice any details of that corridor. It's an exit. We don't know, and don't care, what's in front of Main Engineering. There's no STORYTELLING reason to be a stickler about something that you barely see for a couple of seconds of screen time, if by doing so you have to TOTALLY TRASH the primary design intent of the set in question.

The "vertical intermix shaft" goes from the bottom of the secondary hull to the impulse deflection chamber. PERIOD. If you don't want to buy that, that's your prerogative, and since the ship doesn't "really" exist, you can decide that in your own "personal canon." But the TMP ship is based upon this as one of the most central aspects of the design. To change it is sort of like saying that you don't really NEED that spine going from your pelvis to your skull.
And even if it is only seen twice - well, its still there, isn't it, no matter how many times you see it?
Not so much, no. The set no longer exists, so the only place it "exists" is on about 2 seconds worth of film, in the background.

I can live with it being "not exactly as seen" for those two seconds of film. Especially if you have to totally compromise the design of the ship, both in terms of internal arrangement and in terms of scale, to accomplish that trivial change.
And my argument isn't really about storytelling - its about the reconciliation with what is seen on-screen (ie, canonical Trek) with the technical realisation and design of the ship from a practical standpoint. I have seen Mr Probert's drawing and I appreciate that was the design intent. My point is that the intent doesn't mesh with canon, and concepts are simply that - concepts. Not final realisations.
Sorry, you're playing "revisionist" in order to make your PERSONAL PREFERENCE take precedence over some other items.

In other words... where two features don't necessarily "match" perfectly, you've chosen the one you'll reject and the one you'll keep.

That's perfectly fine... but it's NOT fine to insist that everyone else accept that the choice you've personally made is the one that they have to accept as well.

You clearly have a preference in how you look at things towards the existing sets. I have a preference towards making sets and external ship design "match up" properly. CTM has a preference towards implementing a physical version of a drawing set he has and turning it, with the least amount of "tweaking" possible, into a 3D "world."

All are OK. All are simply personal preference. After all, NONE of this is real.

You can make recommendations, but if your recommendations are rejected... please let it go. This is CTM's project, not yours, and he's doing this for his own purposes, not in order to meet YOUR requirements (or mine, or anyone elses!)

I've made my own suggestions to CTM, and he's taken a few and left a few alone, and that's FINE with me. I think his work is terrific, and a lot of fun to watch. Enough that I'm starting to think that I might try this one next, if I ever really get around to finishing my TOS one (I've been distracted by real life... specifically, the female portion thereof... recently! )
Cary L. Brown is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:24 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.