RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 135,769
Posts: 5,216,781
Members: 24,218
Currently online: 774
Newest member: momogila

TrekToday headlines

Q Meets NuTrek Crew
By: T'Bonz on Apr 18

Pine In Talks For Drama
By: T'Bonz on Apr 18

New X-Men: Days of Future Past Trailer
By: T'Bonz on Apr 17

Nimoy to Receive Award
By: T'Bonz on Apr 17

Star Trek Special: Flesh and Stone Comic
By: T'Bonz on Apr 16

These Are The Voyages TOS Season Two Book Review
By: T'Bonz on Apr 16

Kirk’s Well Wishes To Kirk
By: T'Bonz on Apr 15

Quinto In New Starz Series
By: T'Bonz on Apr 15

Star Trek: Horizon Film
By: T'Bonz on Apr 14

Star Trek: Fleet Captains Game Expansion
By: T'Bonz on Apr 14


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 27 2013, 02:17 AM   #271
Praetor
Vice Admiral
 
Praetor's Avatar
 
Location: The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

And now for something a bit heretical...



The Excelsior is 622 meters long, per her window alignment.

The refit Enterprise is about 415 meters long, or 2/3 the Excelsior's length as their relational sizes were intended.

The Oberth would be about 300 meters long, give or take, and would probably work out well for the Tsiolkovsky.

I quite honestly haven't figured the Miranda's length, but I had her cross section handy so I went ahead and threw her in. I'd guess her to be around 300 meters long too.

Quite honestly, I don't hate it. I know the size of the refit was fairly well pinned down by Mr. Probert, but blssdwlf has proven that interior details point to a ship somewhat bigger on the inside to include the cargo/shuttlebay complex.

Plus, I don't think the Galaxy looks entirely too small next to any of them, which was a main fear of mine. The Excelsior is still mostly nacelle, and the Galaxy still has more livable interior space. Even more interestingly, I suspect scaling a Constellation similarly would match some of the janky scaling seen in "The Battle" et al.

Thoughts?
__________________
"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 27 2013, 04:01 AM   #272
blssdwlf
Commodore
 
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

Those look pretty interesting, IMHO. I do like the idea that the Excelsior was as long as the Galaxy.

So are you thinking about going with your own "unofficial" sizing?
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 27 2013, 04:08 AM   #273
Nob Akimoto
Captain
 
Location: The People's Republic of Austin
View Nob Akimoto's Twitter Profile
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

I suppose the question is really if the Galaxy scaling needs to stay the same in that relation, actually.

Is there some reason she needs to be fixed if everything else is being adjusted for size?
Nob Akimoto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 27 2013, 09:27 AM   #274
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

Funny, seeing it like this with the E-D cross section it feels like the intermix shaft (of the E-A) moved further astern while the deuterium tanks (?) / humpback of the E-B moved ahead.

However, reducing the size of the E-D should have interesting consequences for the possible whereabouts of Ten Forward.

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 27 2013, 05:34 PM   #275
B.J.
Rear Admiral
 
B.J.'s Avatar
 
Location: Huntsville, AL, USA
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

Reduced? Looks like it's still 642m long here. It's just the sizes of the other ships that were increased.
__________________
B.J. --- bj-o23.deviantart.com
B.J. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 27 2013, 08:31 PM   #276
Praetor
Vice Admiral
 
Praetor's Avatar
 
Location: The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

blssdwlf wrote: View Post
Those look pretty interesting, IMHO. I do like the idea that the Excelsior was as long as the Galaxy.

So are you thinking about going with your own "unofficial" sizing?
You know, at first I was dead-set in the 467 meter Excelsior camp, but the longer I look at the above image, the more I feel like it just makes sense.

For funsies, I'm probably going to throw the TOS Enterprise and Constellation in there too and scale accordingly. But right now, I'm definitely leaning more towards this scheme. Precise measurements are still a bit TBD, but I feel like this is the general sizing I want to go with.

I seem to recall that TNG-era decks are taller than previous era decks. Does anyone recall similarly?

Nob Akimoto wrote: View Post
I suppose the question is really if the Galaxy scaling needs to stay the same in that relation, actually.

Is there some reason she needs to be fixed if everything else is being adjusted for size?
Eh, not particularly, except that I feel like the D and the Voyager are two ships that have their sizes pretty well pinned down; everything seems to fit as it should. But no, it doesn't have to.

It does make for a potential interesting side-by-side with the Ambassador, doesn't it? And I've yet to throw the Defiant into the mix. Bwahahaha!

If anything, we may end up with a ginormous Enterprise-E...

Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
Funny, seeing it like this with the E-D cross section it feels like the intermix shaft (of the E-A) moved further astern while the deuterium tanks (?) / humpback of the E-B moved ahead.
It does kind of work out elegantly, doesn't it?

Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
However, reducing the size of the E-D should have interesting consequences for the possible whereabouts of Ten Forward.
B.J. wrote: View Post
Reduced? Looks like it's still 642m long here. It's just the sizes of the other ships that were increased.
B.J., you are right - I simply upsized the rest. I scaled the Excelsior to her window rows (which for the life of me I don't know why Bernd always considered impossible - it's actually really easy.) Then, I maintained the 3:2 ratio of Excelsior to refit Enterprise, and let the decks fall where they may.

The nice thing about the D is that the hull edge section is rather ambiguous. It seems like a mid-step deck is in order to make 10-Forward work. Turns out the Galaxy is a split level.

I'm going to do a bit of scaling and fleshing out tonight/over the weekend, and maybe test fitting some components.
__________________
"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 27 2013, 10:36 PM   #277
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

Here's a couple of Enterprise-E's I made over a year ago, when I realized how different the MSD and actual model of the ship were.

Here's the Enterprise-E's size to match the MSD's deck numbering and heights:

That said, I believe John Eaves or somebody posted (in the thread below) saying that the E-E's decks do in fact fit into 685m, despite what the MSD (based on concept art) suggests.

THIS old thread may be of interest, although I should point out I've since changed my stance on some of it!
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 28 2013, 12:20 AM   #278
Praetor
Vice Admiral
 
Praetor's Avatar
 
Location: The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

Thanks, King. It's kind of that thread's fault I started reconsidering all this.

If I may ask, what have you changed your mind about since then?
__________________
"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 28 2013, 01:14 AM   #279
Nob Akimoto
Captain
 
Location: The People's Republic of Austin
View Nob Akimoto's Twitter Profile
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

Maybe we should start with a baseline of the ILM scaled JJprise, and then scale up everything from there....
Nob Akimoto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 28 2013, 03:28 AM   #280
Praetor
Vice Admiral
 
Praetor's Avatar
 
Location: The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

I'm not interested in addressing the Abramsverse ships, really, at all. I also don't need them for my purposes.

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.
__________________
"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 28 2013, 04:23 AM   #281
Praetor
Vice Admiral
 
Praetor's Avatar
 
Location: The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

Did a bit of math and here's my results. Click to embiggen the image.



We begin with the 622 meter Excelsior, scaled from her window rows. Sized as-is in my file, she's 2363 px. I then scale the Enterprise refit to 2/3 Excelsior size to maintain the relative size difference first put forth at the official, smaller scale. At 1575 px, she's 415 meters long. I scaled the Miranda, TOS Enterprise to match, and for good measure throw in the four-deck saucer version of the Oberth.

Overall:
Excelsior: @ 622 meters/2363 px & 35 decks
Ent refit: @ 415 meters/1575 px & 33 decks
Miranda: @ 326 meters/1240 px & 19 decks (5 in rollbar pod)
Ent TOS: @ 408 meters/1552 px & 33 decks
Oberth: @ 260 meters/988 px & 17 decks

The classic era ships don't look bad at these sizes next to the Galaxy to me, while maintaining internal relative scaling fairly well and also making Galaxy to Excelsior and Galaxy to Oberth seem more like what we saw on TNG. It flies in the face of official convention, but that in and of itself doesn't bother me. What I wonder is, does the preponderance of evidence agree more with the above, or more with the official scaling?

Thoughts and opinions?
__________________
"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 28 2013, 05:00 PM   #282
blssdwlf
Commodore
 
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

I agree that the other ships feel bigger than their official dimensions. With the TMP Enterprise some of the scaling does get limited by the circlular docking ports but I think 415m is within reason (although I haven't tried to see how much bigger that opening is relative to a person.)
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 28 2013, 07:30 PM   #283
Dukhat
Commodore
 
Dukhat's Avatar
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

Praetor wrote: View Post
The classic era ships don't look bad at these sizes next to the Galaxy to me, while maintaining internal relative scaling fairly well and also making Galaxy to Excelsior and Galaxy to Oberth seem more like what we saw on TNG. It flies in the face of official convention, but that in and of itself doesn't bother me. What I wonder is, does the preponderance of evidence agree more with the above, or more with the official scaling?

Thoughts and opinions?
Actually, this scale ends up working both for the side views of the Tsiolkovsky and the Stargazer when shown flying next to the Enterprise-D.

I also have felt that the Connie was much larger than "officially" stated, and likewise the Oberth too. I'm totally fine with your interpretations here.
__________________
“Don’t believe everything you read on the internet.”
– Benjamin Franklin
Dukhat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 28 2013, 07:41 PM   #284
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

Praetor wrote: View Post
Thanks, King. It's kind of that thread's fault I started reconsidering all this.

If I may ask, what have you changed your mind about since then?
The new Enterprise's size. Although I'm very suspicious of the shuttlebay and engineering fitting into that secondary hull, I'm 100% convinced that the (high detail) bridge window, airlocks, deck spacings and window rows all support a 725m size.
Praetor wrote: View Post
Did a bit of math and here's my results. Click to embiggen the image.



We begin with the 622 meter Excelsior, scaled from her window rows. Sized as-is in my file, she's 2363 px. I then scale the Enterprise refit to 2/3 Excelsior size to maintain the relative size difference first put forth at the official, smaller scale. At 1575 px, she's 415 meters long. I scaled the Miranda, TOS Enterprise to match, and for good measure throw in the four-deck saucer version of the Oberth.

Overall:
Excelsior: @ 622 meters/2363 px & 35 decks
Ent refit: @ 415 meters/1575 px & 33 decks
Miranda: @ 326 meters/1240 px & 19 decks (5 in rollbar pod)
Ent TOS: @ 408 meters/1552 px & 33 decks
Oberth: @ 260 meters/988 px & 17 decks

The classic era ships don't look bad at these sizes next to the Galaxy to me, while maintaining internal relative scaling fairly well and also making Galaxy to Excelsior and Galaxy to Oberth seem more like what we saw on TNG. It flies in the face of official convention, but that in and of itself doesn't bother me. What I wonder is, does the preponderance of evidence agree more with the above, or more with the official scaling?

Thoughts and opinions?
The Reliant's saucer rim windows have always looked wrong to me. As if the modeller put one row in the centre of the rim, realized his mistake and crammed another row just underneath to better resemble the Enterprise's two-deck arrangement - only if there were two decks, the upper row would be ankle-high and the lower would be overhead.

The solution, of course, is a three or four-deck saucer rim
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 29 2013, 02:54 PM   #285
Irishman
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Charlotte, NC
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

Timo wrote: View Post
True enough. Then again, some of the higher-end estimates for size would allow for two sets of deck numbers, with the set starting at the top of the dorsal reaching Deck 15 right where Kirk sucked vacuum.

The idea of the great ship twisting and turning in order to exit the dock is the one the "Starfleet designers must have had ideas of their own" argument tries to avoid. As for using another door, the ship was parked between "piers" that delineate one-quarter of the interior, one associated with the door the Enterprise used. Again, wriggling around the pier to a different door is a possibility, but of the "against Starfleet intent" category...

Personally, I'd facilitate a larger Excelsior by pretending that the Enterprise was smaller when going through the door.

Timo Saloniemi
The answer is nanotubes!

Make the door as big as is needed for each starship.
Irishman 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 06:20 AM.

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