The 11-foot TOS Enterprise model-

[feek61]

alchemist wrote:

---

Feek61,

I don't know how to get a hold of you through PM, so when you get a moment please PM me. I have a high-resolution scan of a bridge graphic I want to send you.

Dave

Dave,
Couldn't get a hold of you because I don't yet have the minimum 50 post needed to be able to PM but please email me at:

tosgraphics69 - at - gmail.com

I will be looking for you and if anyone else can PM Dave for me and give him my email address that would be grand.

[feek61]

I did get a hold of Dave so no need to PM him for me. BTW, Dave REALLY hooked me up!! Thank you Dave!!

[ZapBrannigan]

You know how the warp nacelles are tapered, so they have a smaller diameter at the aft end?

Question: was this a styling choice, meaning the audience was supposed to see it?

Or was it a trick intended to create forced perspective and make the model look huge? If it was just a forced perspective feature, then you could argue that the "real" nacelle design is a straight cylinder.

[scotpens]

ZapBrannigan wrote:

---

You know how the warp nacelles are tapered, so they have a smaller diameter at the aft end?

Question: was this a styling choice, meaning the audience was supposed to see it?

Or was it a trick intended to create forced perspective and make the model look huge?

Probably both. Think of how the Enterprise's nacelles would look if they were simple cylinders with a constant diameter. They'd look clunky and tail-heavy.

The full-size mockup of the Galileo shuttlecraft had a slight decrease in width from back to front for the same reasons.

[Warped9]

scotpens wrote:

---

The full-size mockup of the Galileo shuttlecraft had a slight decrease in width from back to front for the same reasons.

Your source for that assertion? Everything I've studied about the Galileo has never indicated that.

[Search4]

Warped9 wrote:

---

Your source for that assertion? Everything I've studied about the Galileo has never indicated that.

I might be able to answer that... Galileo actually gets a bit wider as you move towards the back. About a 6 inch difference.

[plynch]

McCoy: (hits briefing room table) Don't disrupt a conjectural, hypothetical BBS discussion with facts, man! Green-blooded, poiny-eared . . .

[Warped9]

Search4 wrote:

---

I might be able to answer that... Galileo actually gets a bit wider as you move towards the back. About a 6 inch difference.

That's already widely known as the mock-up was built with a measure of forced perspective to the design to make the 22ft. exterior look bigger than it really is from certain angles. But it's also integral to the design as it's mimicked on the filming miniature. But on neither is there any indication that the nacelles (or the access hatch) had any taper to them.

[Maurice]

I don't believe the shuttle was built with any forced perspective. True forced perspective only works from a limited set of angles and you don't use it for a mockup you'll be shooting from all kinds of directions. Furthermore, while the height of the fuselage tapers towards the back, the width of the craft increases slightly in inverse relation, and most of this is completely unnoticeable when you're up close to the mockup. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

[Warped9]

Maurice wrote:

---

I don't believe the shuttle was built with any forced perspective. True forced perspective only works from a limited set of angles and you don't use it for a mockup you'll be shooting from all kinds of directions. Furthermore, while the height of the fuselage tapers towards the back, the width of the craft increases slightly in inverse relation, and most of this is completely unnoticeable when you're up close to the mockup. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

Maybe I misunderstood how you said this.

The design of the craft widens in height and width from front to back.

[scotpens]

Warped9 wrote:

---

The design of the craft widens in height and width from front to back.

More specifically, the roof of the craft slopes downward from front to back, but the raised, curved side extensions have a slight rise from front to back.

I think.

Warped9 wrote:

---

That's already widely known as the mock-up was built with a measure of forced perspective to the design to make the 22ft. exterior look bigger than it really is from certain angles. But it's also integral to the design as it's mimicked on the filming miniature. But on neither is there any indication that the nacelles (or the access hatch) had any taper to them.

That's what I meant to say -- not that the Galileo's nacelles had a taper (they obviously don't), but that the shuttle itself (the main hull) narrows from back to front.

[Maurice]

^^^Yup.

[AshGL1914]

So while this project has been dormant, it's not dead or forgotten by Steve, Mike, or any of us. I've been undercover for awhile with some real world issues, notably a move to Las Vegas, and taking on a new job as a social media manager for ANOVOS. But I've been making some new friends along the way and they are as interested in seeing the Enterprise restored as we are. I'll also be meeting a few people at SDCC, and this year's Vegas con (both now working gigs for me), and hope to perhaps set up formal meetings for this project at both cons.

[publiusr]

Good to hear. I bet Rod Roddenberry has the 3 footer at home. I really want that to be scanned. He might not admit it publically, since Paramount technically owns it.

[feek61]

The 3 footer was GIVEN to GR after the series ended; so he owns it. The story goes that it was loaned out and never returned. In any case Paramount does not own it.