Has anyone ever considered a similar tweaking of other space vessels in TOS, namely the Class F shuttlecraft, the Romulan Bird of Prey, K-7, etc.?
Yep, I've considered all of them, and the G7 shuttle is definite, and I have strong thoughts about the RBOP too. K-7, maybe. And a Klingon heavy-cruiser as well perhaps some day. deg
The lighting on your sky scene is perfect. I can't wait to see what this baby looks like flying through space!
Absolutely beautiful! Quick question.....Was there ever an explanation for those triangular shaped panels on the bottom of the saucer section? The original Enterprise has them also and I always wondered what they were (landing leg doors?)
Thanks dude. Yes, that is what I seem to recall once reading, that they were gear doors. That's kinda a loose concept IMO though. Where are the rear gear doors? Not the centered panels on the bottom of the 2nd hull, otherwise it would tip over. And then there's the fact that Gene made up the transporter for production costs considerations (too expensive to do a landing efx every week), so he ruled out that E could land. Whatever they are, they're a nice panel nurnie at the least. deg
There was some fanon (that was adopted by some of the comics I think) that said the saucer on the original constitution could detach from the neck of the ship as a giant escape pod. Those triangle bits would be fine for landing gear if you're just talking about the saucer.
Saucer-sep was actually Gene's own concept, never realized until TNG. Still, the industrial mechanics of that gear concept for just the saucer is still pretty thin. Balance would be way off. There would have to be some sort of rear gear as well to stabilize the weight distribution. deg
One of the semi-pro tech manuals originally available through Lincoln Enterprises (I think it was the "officer's Manual") suggested, via illustrations drawn by Doug Drexler, that the "neck" linking the primary saucer with the engineering cylinder stayed connected to the saucer (rather than the secondary hull). The "neck" served as a third "leg" when the "triangles" angled downwards to form legs. Crew could then exit the "C57D" inspired arrangement via the "neck". My problem with this arrangement are the "triangles". As depicted in the diagram, their "points" would bear the majority of the saucer's weight. To accomodate the height of the "neck", the triangles had to angle almost vertical. Unless the saucer landed upon solid basalt rock, the triangles would sink into the soil, causing the emergency landing craft to tip dangerously forward. One thing I did like from that book was the idea the turbolift cars could double as escape pods. There was considerable hardware underneath the floor for life suggest and modest flight correction. The top of the car contained descent foils (parachutes). Sincerely, Bill
No argument there, but even in your own (excellent might I add) model there are any number of panels where some rear gear might pop down.
Yes, I had heard long ago Bill, the idea of the dorsal pylon acting as the rear gear. Funny, I never thought of them coming down as vertical stilts. Seems in some ways (your well-made stability point aside), a better concept than what I had imagined. I had always imagined them coming straight down and the tris acting as pads. The tris would then also have to be able to flex level, as they (when retracted) contour to the shape of the hull. If so, there would have to be some lateral sectional lines for them to work/flex properly. However, given the depth of the saucer, don't ask me where the leg(s) hardware would be able to be stored. Even if the legs had multiple scissor pivots, that would still be pushing it as far as storage space goes (esp. if trying to match the dorsal pylon's height as read gear). Still, as to what you were referring to. I believe that is "after-the-fact" (albeit pro-based) conceptualization-al extrapolation (which is still fine IMO), as I don't beleive Gene conceived it that way, as even in TNG, the saucer-sep'ed at the join-root hi-side of the pylon. And, I believe I remember seeing a drawing(s) of the refit, with the saucer/dorsal pylon connector mechanism being at the top of the pylon. But I am not sure if that was "Gene conceived," although it was done at the time of production for TMP, and TGBOTG was still alive and involved. Either way, all very to think and talk about. I like the tubolift/escape pod concept too eh. Thanks dude. And that is a very good point, at least with my TOS.5 version, as those other panels were not there in the TOS version. They were there in the refit though, which is what I based my new paneling on. deg
Well, I was thinking on the original studio model, even if they're not denoted by panels, the red lines on the rear underside of the saucer might indicate gear underneath that could fold out for stabalizing the saucer when she lands. (for reference: http://www.treksf.com/podcast/MR_Enterprise.jpg) Another possibility might come from those gray concentric rings on the underside. Some sort of circular supports could come down to cover the sensor dome and have the saucer balanced on its center. The triangles would then be ramps instead of supports. That'd fit with the 50s/60s traditional model of how saucer-style spaceships tended to land. It is a pretty out there theory, I know...but it's fun to think about.
Ahh, sure sure, good thinking dude. I like 'em all. Still, your concept(s) suffer from my own concept's Achilles' Heal, the space to store the extension mechanics. But like we've both said, quite fun to thanks and talk about. Still, in the future, they'll have new ways of storing extension mechanics, right? deg Ps. BTW, I could be wrong, but I don't believe that is an actual shot of the actual studio model. A very nice re-pro though. Thanks for the trouble of including the link. Although FYI; having hard-core studied and built E, I know her quite, ummm, shall we say, intimately <cough> in detail, so just mentioning any part of her, I will know what you are referring to.
After-thought: Your concentric circle(s) concept would work best (space-wise) IMO. Now, where's Robby? Oh yeah, he's on my website. deg
You're right, it's not a shot of the studio model, but I figured the master's replica model would be close enough for discussion purposes. I'm surprised no one ever asked MJ what the triangles were for?
Is it possible that Mr. Probert might know, since I would imagine that they had met or discussed the Big E for TMP?
Oh, I didn't mean to imply that was (gulp, here comes that dreaded word) "canon" (Ugh! What a rancid taste!). It was just those writers' and artists' interpretations. But as you pointed out, where was the "gear" stored? The illustrations showed a telescoping piston linking the point of the "triangle" with the underside of the saucer, a configuration not unlike the Jupiter II. That would consume even more volume. I just take it for what it really was, the 60s "smooth skin" equilavent of tank part "greeblies", surface detail that merely added visual interest, but the function of which remained a mystery until such time a script might have made reference (which never happened). Basically a GNDN (Goes Nowhere, Does Nothing) element, much like the markings upon the pipes and panels used upon the live action sets. Sincerely, Bill
I concur, just nurnie detail for interest's sake eh, per chance if referenced/utilized in a script, to be explained if needed, which never came to be. deg