RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 137,882
Posts: 5,329,438
Members: 24,556
Currently online: 686
Newest member: EvyR55

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Inquisition
By: Michelle on Jul 12

Cubify Star Trek 3DMe Mini Figurines
By: T'Bonz on Jul 11

Latest Official Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Jul 10

Seven of Nine Bobble Head
By: T'Bonz on Jul 9

Pegg The Prankster
By: T'Bonz on Jul 9

More Trek Stars Join Unbelievable!!!!!
By: T'Bonz on Jul 8

Star Trek #35 Preview
By: T'Bonz on Jul 8

New ThinkGeek Trek Apparel
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

Star Trek Movie Prop Auction
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

Drexler: NX Engineering Room Construction
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7


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 > Misc. Star Trek > Trek Tech

Trek Tech Pass me the quantum flux regulator, will you?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old September 6 2013, 03:13 AM   #181
Praetor
Vice Admiral
 
Praetor's Avatar
 
Location: The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

Prepare for more fuzzy math!

I have a great image of the Jein Excelsior that I used to estimate the decks based on the window rows. It doesn't exactly line up because I was attempting to account for perspective.



So, that gives me about 12 decks in the engineering hull. Using another great side-on image, I estimated a total of 26 decks in the ship, with the top of the saucer sensor dome being about a half-deck tall.



Using the 3.277 meter deck height figure (10 feet, 9 inches), we have here an Excelsior that is roughly 85 meters high and 528 meters long.

So what the hell does this mean? Well, to me it means Jein was aiming to make her a smaller scale than the ILM model, and was probably aiming for the official 467 meter range, but ended up making a slightly bigger ship.

As a refresher, using this same deck height, and using my previous screencap based window analysis, we end up with an ILM Excelsior with 35 decks that is roughly 114 meters tall and 709 meters long.

(By the way, a 467 meter long Excelsior would be about 75 meters tall and have about 23 decks.)

So here, it appears, are our choices, using the 3.277 meter deck height:
  1. ILM scale: 709 meters long, 114 meters tall, 35 decks
  2. Jein scale: 528 meters long, 85 meters tall, 26 decks
  3. Official scale: 467 meters long, 75 meters tall, 23 decks
In any case, we have to ignore the bridge module, or pretend it's round rather than eliptical at the larger scale, at least. And, the similarities between Jein scale and official scale may be such that we wish to pretend the Jein model is "actually" 467 meters.
__________________
"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
Old September 6 2013, 11:26 PM   #182
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

I hate having to ignore any evidence. I believe you'd also have to ignore the module added to the rear of the model (identified as the "aft crew lounge" on the MSD) at the same time as the bridge. It looks to be about five or six decks tall going by window rows.
http://www.modelermagic.com/wordpres...erence-019.jpg


A thought just occurred to me - in DS9's "Emissary" we see an Excelsior-class ship have the entire front of the saucer blasted away, in a manner not too dissimilar to the Enterprise's fate in STIII. I know that for the Enterprise an amazingly detailed wreck model was created, only for all that detail to be hidden beneath animated fire in the movie. Has anyone seen pictures of the wrecked Excelsior saucer model from "Emissary" (which IIRC was also used in the Star Trek: Borg interactive movie game)? It would he interesting to see how many decks or details are visible.

Oh, and Scotty and Chekov standing in the Enterpise-B hull breach from Generatons may be a useful size reference too.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 7 2013, 01:06 AM   #183
Unicron
Continuity Spackle
 
Unicron's Avatar
 
Location: Cybertron
Send a message via ICQ to Unicron
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

That's a good question. I'm not sure what would have happened to the Excelsior class Melbourne after filming was done, and it would be a very interesting reference.
__________________

"My dream is to eat candy and poop emeralds. I'm halfway successful."


Catbert, Evil Director of Human Resources
Unicron is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 7 2013, 01:23 AM   #184
SicOne
Commodore
 
Location: Omaha, NE
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post

Oh, and Scotty and Chekov standing in the Enterpise-B hull breach from Generatons may be a useful size reference too.
I remember an analysis write-up on that scene that suggested a 700-odd-meter length for the ship, but was also inconsistent with the "Decks 13, 14...and 15!" dialogue.
SicOne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 7 2013, 01:51 AM   #185
Praetor
Vice Admiral
 
Praetor's Avatar
 
Location: The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

That's fascinating about the Melbourne, King - I never knew there was another model. It would be great to see it. And I don't like to ignore details either. I'd forgotten about the damn crew lounge!

And, great point about the Enterprise-B. At your suggestion, I've conducted an analysis. For those who haven't seen it, this is the model used to represent the damage in the famous close-up flyby:



One can clearly make out three decks in the leading edge of the hull "flare." I confirmed this assumption by analyzing the following screencap:


You can very clearly make out those three decks there, as well as Chekov and company against them.

Working back from that, I came up with this:


There are 36 decks that fit pretty well. If we assume each deck is 3.277 meters tall, she's 728 meters long and 118 meters tall, excluding the nacelle fins.

However, it's complicated if you take a closer look at this screencap.


Walter Koenig is 1.68 meters (5'6") tall. He's right at 56 pixels. The deck is right at 88 pixels, so that gives us decks that are approximately 2.65 meters (8'8") tall... which is noticeably shorter than generally accepted deck heights.

Since the 728 meter length figure is so good, we may simply wish to assume that the compositing Chekov, Scotty, and Harriman is somewhat off. We may also consider it safe to assume that the hull extensions were constructed at a scale to match the size of the ship since ILM made the modifications... so this scaling may in fact be quite definitive for the ILM model.

As a side note, the lovely image below is currently my wallpaper on my three-screen setup at work to encourage me to think about all this more. Beautiful shot of a beautiful ship... though, zoom in on the lower part of the secondary hull. You can clearly see that the hatch covering the ventral mounting point, which I earlier realized is the real-world reason for the secondary hull chasm "pod." It appears the hatch was slightly misaligned when this pass was done.
__________________
"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
Old September 8 2013, 11:55 PM   #186
Praetor
Vice Admiral
 
Praetor's Avatar
 
Location: The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

Just a breif preview, I've decided to pursue the 728 meter version a bit and see how things end up. I began by field stripping my original cutaway.

__________________
"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
Old September 9 2013, 11:26 AM   #187
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
I hate having to ignore any evidence. I believe you'd also have to ignore the module added to the rear of the model (identified as the "aft crew lounge" on the MSD) at the same time as the bridge. It looks to be about five or six decks tall going by window rows.
http://www.modelermagic.com/wordpres...erence-019.jpg
Yes, this image keeps permanently penetrating my mind, too, even though I'm at full deflector power.

Possibly a passenger module for these members of the Federation and those of the same species as Balok. I mean seriously - and with the apparent majority of humanoid species having an average body height of 6' - these Federation citizens would otherwise be constantly at a disadvantage using a starship's facilities.

Bob
__________________
"The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth" Jean-Luc Picard
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
Albert Einstein
Robert Comsol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 9 2013, 04:42 PM   #188
Praetor
Vice Admiral
 
Praetor's Avatar
 
Location: The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

Well, just like the bridge module, I think I'm going to just have to ignore it. In the case of the "lounge" (which I consider it, too, although moreso for flight crews and the like), those don't necessarily have to be windows. In the case of the bridge module, I think Jackill had the right approach: make it round, and scale it up juuuust a hair.

Part of my personal philosophy is that the "real" starship in the Trekverse is more than the sum of its parts; more than the models, sets, and props used to represent it. It is only natural that the often rushed nature of production will throw the odd monkey wrench into the mix. Further, different fathers of different designs are likely to have different opinions, and not always agree.

So if we are to act like anthropologists and treat the Trekverse like a real place we're trying to understand, there will come times when we as Treknologists simply have to squint and pretend that something makes sense, simply because the preponderance of evidence points to it, even if some of it doesn't.

YMMV of course.

BTW, sorry I made the image above so dinky. I'll provide a somewhat better one later. I'm also still working on the 467 meter version. I may wind up completing both for fun. Depends whether my enthusiasm holds out. I actually completely redrew the outline of the ship after using a couple of good side images of the ship to realize a few of my proportions were out of whack. Most of the guts are still there, but hidden, and will have to be rescaled for this version. I've decided to make an LCARS-style version first, but will probably also make a simple black and white later. (Easier to go from color to black and white than the other way, at least for me.)

Does anyone have any opinions about the warp core placement? I took a page from Jackill here too and aligned it to the deflection crystals, centering it about to the center of the TSFS big one. Also, the computer core is patterned after the one shown in Mr. Sternbach's Constellation cutaway.
__________________
"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
Old September 9 2013, 06:35 PM   #189
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

Praetor wrote: View Post
So if we are to act like anthropologists and treat the Trekverse like a real place we're trying to understand, there will come times when we as Treknologists simply have to squint and pretend that something makes sense, simply because the preponderance of evidence points to it, even if some of it doesn't.
So you think that little of the Federation members of Balok's species and our golden-skinned buffet grabbers?
You know, I'm gonna tell Balok and then the Fesarius will reduce the Excelsior to tiny pieces of equal height.

Or is that actually what you're trying to accomplish here so you can study the Excelsior remains in detail?!?

Bob
__________________
"The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth" Jean-Luc Picard
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
Albert Einstein
Robert Comsol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 9 2013, 06:53 PM   #190
Nob Akimoto
Captain
 
Location: The People's Republic of Austin
View Nob Akimoto's Twitter Profile
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

Maybe it's just an ILM length thing. Everything they do seems pretty big. (Perhaps their sense of scale was affected by doing Star Wars films.)

Didn't ILM also do stuff for the 09 Trek and Into Darkness? Maybe they have anatomy issues there.
Nob Akimoto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 9 2013, 07:32 PM   #191
137th Gebirg
Rear Admiral
 
137th Gebirg's Avatar
 
Location: Who is John Galt?
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

Oooooh, yes, and there has been no end of debate on the size of the NuEnterprise. Some say it's about the size of the prime-universe refit. Others (such as myself) believe that it's considerably bigger, mostly based on the bridge dome area and several other surface details, with more mass than the Enterprise-D and physically longer than the Enterprise-E. Seems that working in the CG world has not mitigated ILM's scaling problems from the old modeling days...
__________________
Gebirgswick - Ind, Tra, Sec & Env.
137th Gebirg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 9 2013, 07:40 PM   #192
Praetor
Vice Admiral
 
Praetor's Avatar
 
Location: The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
So you think that little of the Federation members of Balok's species and our golden-skinned buffet grabbers?
You know, I'm gonna tell Balok and then the Fesarius will reduce the Excelsior to tiny pieces of equal height.

Or is that actually what you're trying to accomplish here so you can study the Excelsior remains in detail?!?

Bob
You know, Balok's people may've been overcompensating with the Fesarius.

Also, check out this little nugget. I daresay the guy selling it has the details pretty close to right, so the image is somewhat helpful in imagining the space further.

Also, I enjoy (and agree with) his writeup:

For years, Trek kit builders have lamented the god-awful bay that goes into the secondary hull of the Excelsior 1/1000 kit. ERTL did not even try to get it right and when R2 repopped the kit, they did not fix it...so I did. This is a 2 piece set that just pops right into place. Now, you can have an accurate Excelsior (or Enterprise B) secondary hull. You can see in the Lakota picture how the underbay should look.
__________________
"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
Old September 11 2013, 06:22 AM   #193
Maurice
Vice Admiral
 
Maurice's Avatar
 
Location: Maurice in San Francisco
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

Guys over at the RPF have iIDed the primary component of the grabber as a kit part from a Tyrrell P34 six-wheeler. You can see the part here.
__________________
* * *
"If you wanted to get a good meeting... just go in and
say 'darker, grittier, sexier' and whatever."
—Glen Larson, 2010

Last edited by Maurice; September 11 2013 at 06:38 AM.
Maurice is online now   Reply With Quote
Old September 11 2013, 10:03 PM   #194
Praetor
Vice Admiral
 
Praetor's Avatar
 
Location: The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

Holy crap, Maurice. I'll be damned if that's not it. Thanks a million.
__________________
"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
Old September 12 2013, 03:24 PM   #195
Albertese
Commodore
 
Albertese's Avatar
 
Location: Portland, OR
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

Maurice wrote: View Post
Guys over at the RPF have iIDed the primary component of the grabber as a kit part from a Tyrrell P34 six-wheeler. You can see the part here.
So, that fellow is scratchbuilding the Rebel Transport from The Empire Strikes Back. Are you saying that the same part was used on the Excelsior model, too? Could make sense, as the two movies were only a few years apart.

--Alex
__________________
Check out my website: www.goldtoothstudio.squarespace.com
Albertese is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
excelsior, uss excelsior

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 10:29 PM.

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