RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,375
Posts: 5,504,274
Members: 25,126
Currently online: 426
Newest member: Ted Dave

TrekToday headlines

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18

IDW Publishing March 2015 Comics
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Paramount Star Trek 3 Expectations
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Star Trek #39 Sneak Peek
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Star Trek 3 Potential Director Shortlist
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Official Starships Collection Update
By: T'Bonz on Dec 15

Retro Review: Prodigal Daughter
By: Michelle on Dec 13

Sindicate Lager To Debut In The US Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12

Rumor Mill: Saldana Gives Birth
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12

New Line of Anovos Enterprise Uniforms
By: T'Bonz on Dec 11


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 December 26 2013, 02:07 AM   #991
kennysmith
Lieutenant Commander
 
Location: sacramento ca
Re: TOS Enterprise WIP

i am to let you all to know that i will be offline as of dec-30-2013 at 12o noon/pm
and i will not have my laptop with me. i know please tell other this. i will be back some time in feb-2014? i hope. nice trying to get the info i need i will have my cell phone i can't answer but i can only look. GOOD BUY FOR NOW.
kennysmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 26 2013, 04:31 AM   #992
blssdwlf
Commodore
 
Re: TOS Enterprise WIP

Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
This has nothing to do with preference.
I dunno. Your preference seems to be only data that supports a wide enough dorsal to fit that vertical shaft through it
__________________
My WIPs: TOS (and TFS) Enterprise / TOS Era Ships
Random Data: Starship Cargo Volumes
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 26 2013, 04:32 AM   #993
blssdwlf
Commodore
 
Re: TOS Enterprise WIP

Shat Happens wrote: View Post
Interesting. This concept of shuttered windows could be used to explain the front-facing windows in the room with the steering wheel (and emergency transmitter) from STV.
Yeah, that's pretty much one of two in-universe options. Shuttered windows or the steering wheel room used virtual screens to simulate windows.
__________________
My WIPs: TOS (and TFS) Enterprise / TOS Era Ships
Random Data: Starship Cargo Volumes
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 21 2014, 10:18 PM   #994
bigjimslade
Ensign
 
Re: TOS Enterprise WIP

blssdwlf wrote: View Post
Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
My English must be worse than I'd like to believe.

I only relied on Kimble's and Big Jim Slade's stern views of the saucer (diameter size figures supposedly undisputed) to arrive at a workable "real-life" width of the impulse engines' exhaust nozzles.

Next, I relied exclusively on the actual stern view images. It's easy to calculate the width of the skegs (and the dorsal in that area) based on the width of the impulse engines' exhaust nozzles.
And that's the head scratcher. So you relied on Kimble's and BJSlade's blueprints to derive a width for the impulse engine nozzles then you switch over to photographs with perspective distortion to derive a width of the skegs to get you a width of the dorsal.

Why didn't you just directly measure the width of the dorsal from the blueprints? Or only rely exclusively on the photos? Instead you've now made your analysis complicated with uncertainty from different and varying degrees of accuracy sources.

Oh and btw, the measured dorsal width of the DE Enterprise is 0.042 x 141.7m = 5.97m or 19.5'. Multiply for a 355m ship and that comes to 6.95m or 22.8'. It's in between the Kimble and BJS blueprints.
I am in the airport with a delay, looking for things to do, so I popped in. This may be letting out the magician's tricks but . . . It's all a matter of art.

I found conflicting information on the saucer diameter (among other things). Some gave it as 46-1/2". Others gave it as 46-3/4". One person told me that it was supposed to be 46-1/2" and overshot in construction. In any event, I tried both and I ended up using 46-3/4" (going from memory here--but I know its the 3/4 not 1/2).

The actual width of the impulse engine as I have it is less scientific than you might imagine. There is a circle of an even radius at an even offset with a tangent line to a point an at even offsets that defines the basic shape.

The final width come from chopping the block at various angles. The width comes from the chopping. That becomes one of the areas of odd measurement. The angles come from a lot of eyeballing and trial-and-error. I have the advantage of doing this in 3D so I can see the effect different changes have. I know that I have done some tweaking of those angles since the first version of the plans.

I don't have/never had access to the original model. There are basic measurements of a lot of things (e.g. length, saucer diameter, warp engine length, diameter, engineering hull length) that I use. But the sources often conflict and how accurate are they? I use the length 100". Is the 100-inch studio model exactly 100"?--we work within our limitations.

I base everything off of round sizes and offsets. In most cases I go no lower than 1/16" (in a few places 1/32"). For very small details (e.g. grid lines), I might go down to multiples of 0.01". Lengths defined by angles do have odd values.

It would be silly for me to make a part precisely 11.00274" wide when I am largely working off of photographs.

The bottom line, is all of this is done to be close enough for government work.

Furthermore, the raster images give up a lot of detail and accuracy. There are things that look like angles in the images that come out as curves when printed full size.

I have generated a new set of plans. The only dramatic difference is in the hangar door. However, this one contains measurements of all kinds of things to take the guess work out. It also expands to 15 sheets (from 8).
bigjimslade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 24 2014, 09:38 PM   #995
JJohnson
Captain
 
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Re: TOS Enterprise WIP

Keep up the good work on this! It's always good to see the original Enterprise online.

As a brief aside, how would you take the original Enterprise and 'modernize' the interiors, such as the corridors and engineering, without putting a brewery in the engineering hull? Would you put in a vertical or horizontal intermix chamber?
JJohnson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 25 2014, 02:28 AM   #996
blssdwlf
Commodore
 
Re: TOS Enterprise WIP

JJohnson wrote: View Post
Keep up the good work on this! It's always good to see the original Enterprise online.

As a brief aside, how would you take the original Enterprise and 'modernize' the interiors, such as the corridors and engineering, without putting a brewery in the engineering hull? Would you put in a vertical or horizontal intermix chamber?
Thanks

Modernize the TOS E? I probably wouldn't change anything they did when they upgraded it for TMP because I'm a fan of the TMP E...

Hypothetically, I'd say Voyager's sets would work as a modern version as they had the "wide" corridors like the TOS sets so probably something Voyager-esque.
__________________
My WIPs: TOS (and TFS) Enterprise / TOS Era Ships
Random Data: Starship Cargo Volumes
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 25 2014, 08:31 PM   #997
Mytran
Fleet Captain
 
Mytran's Avatar
 
Location: North Wales
Re: TOS Enterprise WIP

I had a similar thought when musing on the TMP sets recently. If as we are told in the novel this was supposed to be how the ST Universe "really" looked all along (with TOS an in-universe dramatization based on the Captain's logs), then how would the TOS-E really have looked?

The TOS-E corridors certainly took a lot of flak back in the day for the being unnaturally wide. TMP tried to soften this by inserting the K-beams on the 8' width, leading to actual walkways of around 4' (plus elbow room). For this to represent an "improvement" over the original, the TOS corridors could not have been larger - I think 4' wide is about right, but with straight walls. In fact, very similar to DS9's Defiant! Or maybe Voyager's Deck 15?

I think we'd also have to dismiss the bright colour scheme seen throughout the series as well. There is a much more natural progression between the colour scheme in The Cage and that goes for the uniforms too!

All in all, I am much happier with what we got
Mytran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 26 2014, 05:59 PM   #998
blssdwlf
Commodore
 
Re: TOS Enterprise WIP

Very true. Don't forget though that TOS also had the rarely seen 4' wide corridors.
__________________
My WIPs: TOS (and TFS) Enterprise / TOS Era Ships
Random Data: Starship Cargo Volumes
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 27 2014, 02:59 AM   #999
Shat Happens
Captain
 
Shat Happens's Avatar
 
Re: TOS Enterprise WIP

Is this thread and WIP abandoned? I'd love to see more CGIs of the original Enterprise innards. You know, this thread (which I found via Google while researching for a little CGI proiject of myself) is what made me register in trekbbs.
Shat Happens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 27 2014, 03:29 AM   #1000
blssdwlf
Commodore
 
Re: TOS Enterprise WIP

@Shat Happens - Not abandoned but more on a break. I had some personal events to take care of so my cgi time is more limited than before. I'll return to it as time permits. Thanks for asking!
__________________
My WIPs: TOS (and TFS) Enterprise / TOS Era Ships
Random Data: Starship Cargo Volumes
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 19 2014, 02:04 AM   #1001
CuttingEdge100
Commodore
 
CuttingEdge100's Avatar
 
Re: TOS Enterprise WIP

Myrtran

I did a proportional comparison basing the shuttles on a 24' design (each shuttle is 32 pixels) and I got a length of 1,644.75 feet or 501.3213m

Admittedly the decks are a little bit excessively large 13.5 feet without even factoring the spacing between the decks. I think the minimum size to shoehorn the shuttles in this drawing would be 1,315.8 feet or 401.057 meters (tight fit); based on deck-space it would appear that 1370.625 feet or 417.7678 meters would accommodate 10' decks with 1.25 feet of spacing or 7.5 inches between each deck (the decks looked to be around 10' high); with provision for provision for 12' decks not counting space in between you'd be right set at 1644.75 feet.

Regardless, I don't think most decks are going to be 12-feet high (you'll see an occasional deck that has a larger ceiling than others), so the 417.77 meter frame would probably be fine based on these measurements.

However, if we match the bottom rims of the saucers (my preferred method) then we get a TOS Enterprise of 1,437' - coincidentally a very close visual match for Drexler's cutaway of 1,420', so at least we know what it would look like!
When I looked at that drawing, I got 1644.75 feet (I proportionally measured the pixels for the shuttle craft at 24 feet), provided I assumed a 22-foot shuttle (or a slightly "tighter" fit), I'd get 1,507.5445 feet. I'm not sure where you got 1,420 or 1,437 from.


Maurice

Ahhh! Make it go away. One of the most effed up Enterprise shots ever, from the missing docking port to the totally misaligned saucer and nacelle. Ugh!
May I remind you of the scene in Star Trek V when the Enterprise-A went off to warp after Kirk crash-landed?

The ship traveled sideways relative to the warp-streak!

Regardless, based on what I said with the minimum size for the shuttles, 1315.8 feet would do the trick so I'm fine with 1,420 or 1,437 if it all fits; with that said, the refit enterprise to the same scale ((1000/947)x1437) would be 1,517.423 feet or 462.5121 meters!
__________________
"In closing, I want to remind everybody that no matter how I die, it was murder, and should I be framed for some criminal offense, or disappear entirely; you know who to blame."

Last edited by CuttingEdge100; September 19 2014 at 03:27 AM.
CuttingEdge100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 19 2014, 09:54 AM   #1002
Mytran
Fleet Captain
 
Mytran's Avatar
 
Location: North Wales
Re: TOS Enterprise WIP

CuttingEdge100 wrote: View Post
However, if we match the bottom rims of the saucers (my preferred method) then we get a TOS Enterprise of 1,437' - coincidentally a very close visual match for Drexler's cutaway of 1,420', so at least we know what it would look like!
When I looked at that drawing, I got 1644.75 feet (I proportionally measured the pixels for the shuttle craft at 24 feet), provided I assumed a 22-foot shuttle (or a slightly "tighter" fit), I'd get 1,507.5445 feet. I'm not sure where you got 1,420 or 1,437 from.
Looking back at my earlier post on page 60, it seems I was playing around with figures to get Robert_Comsol's theory about the dorsal to work, then (very roughly) backscaling that to give a figure for the TOS-E. I used the technique of matched the saucer rims as I figured that would be the most "realistic" method of continuity between the original ship and its refit design.

As the rest of that post made clear, 1,437' really would be a massive ship (and later discussions in this thread raised the problems of matching onscreen footage of the clamshell doors with such a vessel.

The 1,420' length of Drexler's cutaway comes from KingDaniel's calculations here.

I recently reran the calculations recently on how big the TOS-E would be (if the basic diameter of the saucer was kept from original to refit) this time with greater accuracy. I'll try and post my working (and the orthos used) later today. However, running with Blssdwlf's calculations of a 1,164' TMP-E, I calculated the TOS-E to be 1,250' long.
Mytran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 19 2014, 06:28 PM   #1003
blssdwlf
Commodore
 
Re: TOS Enterprise WIP

CuttingEdge100 wrote: View Post
Myrtran

I did a proportional comparison basing the shuttles on a 24' design (each shuttle is 32 pixels) and I got a length of 1,644.75 feet or 501.3213m

Admittedly the decks are a little bit excessively large 13.5 feet without even factoring the spacing between the decks. I think the minimum size to shoehorn the shuttles in this drawing would be 1,315.8 feet or 401.057 meters (tight fit); based on deck-space it would appear that 1370.625 feet or 417.7678 meters would accommodate 10' decks with 1.25 feet of spacing or 7.5 inches between each deck (the decks looked to be around 10' high); with provision for provision for 12' decks not counting space in between you'd be right set at 1644.75 feet.

Regardless, I don't think most decks are going to be 12-feet high (you'll see an occasional deck that has a larger ceiling than others), so the 417.77 meter frame would probably be fine based on these measurements.
It's been a while since I looked at the measurements but I would think that there will be a mix of 10' thru 16' decks on the ship just to account for the various deck heights on screen. As to the length, your guess is as good as mine.


CuttingEdge100 wrote: View Post
May I remind you of the scene in Star Trek V when the Enterprise-A went off to warp after Kirk crash-landed?
ST5 had a lot of visual fx problems. Enough that I'd discount everything from the time they went to sleep at the camp to the end where they're singing at the campfire as a bean-fueled dream. The worse was the vertically distorted shuttlebay.

CuttingEdge100 wrote: View Post
The ship traveled sideways relative to the warp-streak!
Funny enough I didn't have a problem with that since they did a sideways warp shearing away move from a standing stop in "The Corbomite Maneuver".
__________________
My WIPs: TOS (and TFS) Enterprise / TOS Era Ships
Random Data: Starship Cargo Volumes
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 19 2014, 06:29 PM   #1004
blssdwlf
Commodore
 
Re: TOS Enterprise WIP

@Mytran - thanks for the references. I need to get back to this project
__________________
My WIPs: TOS (and TFS) Enterprise / TOS Era Ships
Random Data: Starship Cargo Volumes
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 20 2014, 11:40 AM   #1005
Mytran
Fleet Captain
 
Mytran's Avatar
 
Location: North Wales
Re: TOS Enterprise WIP

No biggie. Sometimes Trek fan-work takes a while. I've been working on my "final 100% accurate set plans" for 3 years now!

Now, I promised to show my working on how I reached my TOS-E length of 1,250' so here goes:

For the Enterprise Refit I used Big Jim's model maker orthos (which are HUGE, for highest accuracy).

For TOS-E I used Casimiro's second edition diagram (which are most accurate for ship shape, if not window placement).

I centred the saucers and enlarged the TOS-E until the bottom edges of the saucers matched. I then realised there was an overlap with the undercuts and had to reduced the size of the TOS-E back a bit (reasoning that the structural frames of the undercut wouldn't have changed either). The end result has the refit-E nestling inside the TOS original, at least when the upper faces of the saucers are aligned:



Now for the maths: Assuming a Refit-Enterprise length of 1,164' (thanks, Blssdwlf!) then the TOS-E comes out at 1,250' long. If you'd rather stick with the "official" 1,000' refit then TOS-E is 1,073' long. And if you'd rather ignore that undercut thing I mentioned earlier and just go with matching the bottom edges of the saucers then TOS-E would be 1,260'. However, my flag is firmly in 1,250'

So, in-universe: The refitting process changed the shape of the TOS-E saucer edge (better warp dynamics, I guess) and the saucer thickness is trimmed down by removing redundant equipment in that area. Other changes in the saucer shape are likewise achieved by removing outdated or damaged areas, leading to a lighter, faster and stronger design of vessel (IMO):


(click for full size)

Obviously the secondary hull underwent more major alterations (I admit that some welding on of extra girders must have happened in places) but for the most part I'm happy with this line of thinking. Over to you, guys!
Mytran is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
decks, interior, movies, tos

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 12:10 PM.

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