RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,746
Posts: 5,433,142
Members: 24,838
Currently online: 368
Newest member: Mei'konda

TrekToday headlines

Episode Four of The Red Shirt Diaries
By: T'Bonz on Sep 22

Star Trek: The Compendium Review
By: T'Bonz on Sep 22

Orci Drops Rangers Project
By: T'Bonz on Sep 22

Retro Review: Image in the Sand
By: Michelle on Sep 20

Star Trek: Shadows Of Tyranny Casting Call
By: T'Bonz on Sep 19

USS Vengeance And More Starship Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Sep 19

Trek 3 To Being Shooting Next Year
By: T'Bonz on Sep 19

Trek Messenger Bag
By: T'Bonz on Sep 18

Star Trek Live In Concert In Australia
By: T'Bonz on Sep 18

IDW Publishing December Trek Comics
By: T'Bonz on Sep 17


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 August 21 2013, 03:14 PM   #46
anh165
Commander
 
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

The Excelsior is 467 meters long, its not particular a large ship just one with long nacelles.

Sulu's tiny living quarters and the bunk beds just sums up how lacking in size that ship is.
__________________
No animals were harmed during posting ...
anh165 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 21 2013, 03:56 PM   #47
Praetor
Vice Admiral
 
Praetor's Avatar
 
Location: The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

Mario de Monti wrote: View Post
Great thread, I thoroughly enjoy it

Praetor wrote: View Post
Looking at this picture, does anyone else have to think of the docking bay of an Imperial Star Destroyer?
YESSSSSS.

(And, glad you're enjoying the thread.)

Mario de Monti wrote: View Post
But it got me thinking: To me this thing inside the bay looks like a "reception point" of some sort. With that trapezoidal opening in the center, flanked/supported be the two sturdy-looking side elements, it seems possible that a special and yet unseen (supply) ship could dock there and/or if it could be used to establish a connection to a space station/dock for resupply purposes.
Interesting thought... this certainly bears some exploration.
__________________
"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 August 21 2013, 04:09 PM   #48
SicOne
Commodore
 
Location: Omaha, NE
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

Assuming the 467-meter length of the Excelsior, what are the dimensions of that underhull alcove? Is it really large enough, with enough "floor space", to serve as a shuttlebay? The curvature of the hull doesn't seem to give it a helluva lot of floor...unless they took a page from nuBSG's Pegasus and reverse the gravity plating to make the floor the ceiling.

Also, where is the Excelsior's main shuttlebay? I thought I saw a cutaway some time ago that showed the main shuttlebay to be in the primary hull, forward of the impulse engines but aft of the bridge. But looking at some of the images in this thread, I'm not so sure. I was always of the impression that the shuttlebay in the stern of the secondary hull was just for cargo shuttles only, and not the main shuttlebay.
SicOne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 21 2013, 04:17 PM   #49
Tallguy
Fleet Captain
 
Tallguy's Avatar
 
Location: Beyond the Farthest Star
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

Mario de Monti wrote: View Post
Great thread, I thoroughly enjoy it

Praetor wrote: View Post
Looking at this picture, does anyone else have to think of the docking bay of an Imperial Star Destroyer?
A friend who got to see the model up close says that's EXACTLY what it looked like and that that's exactly what it is SUPPOSED to look like.
__________________
-- Bill "Tallguy" Thomas
"All I ask is a tall ship..."
Tallguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 21 2013, 04:44 PM   #50
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

So are we looking at three different chasms?
  1. The chasm of the Excelsior from ST III with the submarine propeller blade (kitbashed Ohio Class SSBN?)
  2. The chasm of the Excelsior from ST VI.Could there be two shuttlecraft inside docked to the upper structure, dropship- or TIE fighter-style?
  3. The chasm of the Lakota. I'd assume the basic interior framework had been there from the beginning (built by model makers at ILM under the supervision of ILM Veteran Steve Gawley...definitely Star Destroyer hangar bay )
There is this idea growing on me that the Lakota constitutes a very subtle inside joke. The proud Lakota turned the tables, and now a captured Cardassian ship is at their mercy...

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 August 21 2013, 06:30 PM   #51
Praetor
Vice Admiral
 
Praetor's Avatar
 
Location: The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

Tallguy wrote: View Post
Mario de Monti wrote: View Post
Looking at this picture, does anyone else have to think of the docking bay of an Imperial Star Destroyer?
A friend who got to see the model up close says that's EXACTLY what it looked like and that that's exactly what it is SUPPOSED to look like.
You're pushing me back into shuttlebay land.

Now I'm imagining the ole girl dropping shuttlecraft from that bad boy.

Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
So are we looking at three different chasms?
  1. The chasm of the Excelsior from ST III with the submarine propeller blade (kitbashed Ohio Class SSBN?)
  2. The chasm of the Excelsior from ST VI.Could there be two shuttlecraft inside docked to the upper structure, dropship- or TIE fighter-style?
  3. The chasm of the Lakota. I'd assume the basic interior framework had been there from the beginning (built by model makers at ILM under the supervision of ILM Veteran Steve Gawley...definitely Star Destroyer hangar bay )
At the risk of quoting myself () I'm pretty sure the first three images are the same model... although, I'm starting to question whether the first picture is the Jein version, given that it seems to be resting on a tabletop rather comfortably.

I really think like Unicron says, the propeller is an illusion. I'm fairly sure the second, at least, which shows the girthly "pod" that I had previously made a shuttlebay rather clearly, was taken from the ship's NX era. So I think from NX to NCC, this area didn't change too much.

I still have a problem with the "floor" being round. If this was a drop bay rather than a shuttlebay, it might make sense, with an actual hangar deck above somehow. But I'm having a hard time trying to rationalize it.



Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
There is this idea growing on me that the Lakota constitutes a very subtle inside joke. The proud Lakota turned the tables, and now a captured Cardassian ship is at their mercy...
Or the Excelsior was an in-joke all along... she was trying to chase down the Enterprise in TSFS after all...
__________________
"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 August 21 2013, 08:42 PM   #52
Workbee
Commander
 
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

@Praetor: Glad to be of some assistance, however you might not want to thank me after reading what can of worms I am about to open.

Taking an idea that was brought up in Robert's Enterprise Deck Plans Thread (found here), what if the lower part of the ship with that chasm has gravity oriented different from the rest of the ship? If you were to use this space "upside down" then the curvature simply becomes the arched ceiling and there is a very nice usable landing / staging surface. Making it quite suitable for some kind of cargo/docking bay.

Even though the artificial gravity is basically made up science, if we go by the gravity plate idea from Enterprise, would it be that much of a stretch to assume that a plate that pulls everything above it down to it, could also pull objects below the plate up to itself? If most of that space is simply cargo storage, and not regularly inhabited by crew, then many of the issues that arise from crossing across gravity fields are eliminated.

Bringing this back to the subject, I believe that this opening was not altered until the Enterprise-B/Lakota configuration. According to Memory Alpha, the primary reason for the changes to the model for Star Trek VI were to help reconcile to a different sized bridge set (whether they correctly addressed the problem is another discussion entirely).

I keep looking at this picture. Looking at the back wall within the opening, there seems to be a pattern that resembles those cargo carriers from TMP seen here. If that is what it is, seems that is a very strong indicator that this is meant to be some kind of access to the cargo bay.
Workbee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 21 2013, 09:26 PM   #53
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

Praetor wrote: View Post
I really think like Unicron says, the propeller is an illusion.
NX-2000

Okay, let me try to approach the issue from what I assume would be a kitbasher's approach.

Again, here is the Excelsior publicity shot from ST III with the thingy in the chasm which I said reminded me of the propeller of an Ohio Class submarine.

And here is - same viewing angle - the Ohio Class submarine propeller from a model reproduction.

I'm confident that if you were to blow up the ST III shot with the chasm section and make it the same size as the propeller from the model, we'd get a perfect match.

NCC-2000

Similar story here. Blow up the chasm section in the screenshot with the two thingies hanging on top. These remind me a lot (must be the edges with the fins ) of the ST VI shuttlecraft (Jenolan redresses), that could have been reproduced and downscaled in size to match with the Excelsior model (shouldn't come to much as a surprise as this is the same film). Here are some more shots of the shutlecraft.

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 August 21 2013, 11:11 PM   #54
Praetor
Vice Admiral
 
Praetor's Avatar
 
Location: The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

Workbee wrote: View Post
@Praetor: Glad to be of some assistance, however you might not want to thank me after reading what can of worms I am about to open.

Taking an idea that was brought up in Robert's Enterprise Deck Plans Thread (found here), what if the lower part of the ship with that chasm has gravity oriented different from the rest of the ship? If you were to use this space "upside down" then the curvature simply becomes the arched ceiling and there is a very nice usable landing / staging surface. Making it quite suitable for some kind of cargo/docking bay.

Even though the artificial gravity is basically made up science, if we go by the gravity plate idea from Enterprise, would it be that much of a stretch to assume that a plate that pulls everything above it down to it, could also pull objects below the plate up to itself? If most of that space is simply cargo storage, and not regularly inhabited by crew, then many of the issues that arise from crossing across gravity fields are eliminated.
This is also a great solution - and I'm certainly not averse to the variable gravity notions. I'm starting to feel like I'm going to need to take a poll.

Workbee wrote: View Post
Bringing this back to the subject, I believe that this opening was not altered until the Enterprise-B/Lakota configuration. According to Memory Alpha, the primary reason for the changes to the model for Star Trek VI were to help reconcile to a different sized bridge set (whether they correctly addressed the problem is another discussion entirely).

That was more or less my understanding - although I believe the rear section (in front of the shuttlebay) and the deflection crystal or whatever you want to call it was also changed.

I keep looking at this picture. Looking at the back wall within the opening, there seems to be a pattern that resembles those cargo carriers from TMP seen here. If that is what it is, seems that is a very strong indicator that this is meant to be some kind of access to the cargo bay.
Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
NX-2000

Okay, let me try to approach the issue from what I assume would be a kitbasher's approach.

Again, here is the Excelsior publicity shot from ST III with the thingy in the chasm which I said reminded me of the propeller of an Ohio Class submarine.

And here is - same viewing angle - the Ohio Class submarine propeller from a model reproduction.

I'm confident that if you were to blow up the ST III shot with the chasm section and make it the same size as the propeller from the model, we'd get a perfect match.

NCC-2000

Similar story here. Blow up the chasm section in the screenshot with the two thingies hanging on top. These remind me a lot (must be the edges with the fins ) of the ST VI shuttlecraft (Jenolan redresses), that could have been reproduced and downscaled in size to match with the Excelsior model (shouldn't come to much as a surprise as this is the same film). Here are some more shots of the shutlecraft.
I dunno... I'm still not sold on the propeller, but you latter idea is an intrgiuging one.
__________________
"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 August 22 2013, 03:07 AM   #55
sojourner
Admiral
 
sojourner's Avatar
 
Location: I'm at WKRP
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

Robert Comsol wrote: View Post

Again, here is the Excelsior publicity shot from ST III with the thingy in the chasm which I said reminded me of the propeller of an Ohio Class submarine.

And here is - same viewing angle - the Ohio Class submarine propeller from a model reproduction.

I'm confident that if you were to blow up the ST III shot with the chasm section and make it the same size as the propeller from the model, we'd get a perfect match.


Bob
Sorry, not seein' it.
__________________
Baby, you and me were never meant to be, just maybe think of me once in a while...
sojourner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 22 2013, 06:24 AM   #56
Workbee
Commander
 
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

@Praetor: Just realized that one of the pictures I used to support my cargo bay argument may have been from the Greg Jein model, not the original studio model. Can anyone confirm if this picture is the original or the Greig Jein model?
__________________
I was wondering why the people who would never dream of laughing at a blind or a crippled man would laugh at a moron? - Charly Gordon
Workbee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 22 2013, 09:44 AM   #57
Mario de Monti
Captain
 
Mario de Monti's Avatar
 
Location: Heidelberg, Germany
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

sojourner wrote: View Post
Robert Comsol wrote: View Post

Again, here is the Excelsior publicity shot from ST III with the thingy in the chasm which I said reminded me of the propeller of an Ohio Class submarine.

And here is - same viewing angle - the Ohio Class submarine propeller from a model reproduction.

I'm confident that if you were to blow up the ST III shot with the chasm section and make it the same size as the propeller from the model, we'd get a perfect match.


Bob
Sorry, not seein' it.
Im not sure if it is a screw from an Ohio class sub, but something that sure looks like a ship propeller is definitely inside that bay of the Excelsior. Anyway, what model kit that propeller came from makes little difference, IMHO.

Mario
__________________
"Do you give me attitude, Spock?" - "Im expressing multiple attitudes simultaneously, Sir. To which are you referring?"
Mario de Monti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 22 2013, 01:08 PM   #58
Workbee
Commander
 
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

@Robert: I am trying to see this propeller as well. I see (what looks to me like) a series of ribs along the "floor" of the opening -- is this what you are seeing as the propeller or was it something else?
Workbee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 22 2013, 01:35 PM   #59
Mario de Monti
Captain
 
Mario de Monti's Avatar
 
Location: Heidelberg, Germany
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

If Im not mistaken, this is (circled in red):

http://s966.photobucket.com/user/hil...tml?sort=3&o=0
__________________
"Do you give me attitude, Spock?" - "Im expressing multiple attitudes simultaneously, Sir. To which are you referring?"
Mario de Monti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 22 2013, 01:45 PM   #60
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: Scaling the Excelsior Filming Model

@ Workbee

I wasn't referring to the ribs which seem to be a consistent feature throughout the chasm (and make it appear that the modules are just placed there temporarily because they don't seem to have a permanent connection to the ribs at the sides).

According to the low-res stern shot of NX-2000 the propeller would sit in the upper center of the chasm, its upper two fifths are concealed by the external upper "lip" of the chasm's "mouth".

The item vaguely resembles a flower or an octopus but probably is a propeller. All we see are three blades, arms or whatever you'd call these. The one at "6 o'clock" looks thinner than the one at 3 o'clock which is exactly what a submarine propeller would look like, taking into account the bended nature of such blades and the viewing angle.

Bob

@ Mario de Monti

Thanks, it is circled in red.
The blades at 7, 8 and 9 o'clock are probably also there but at this viewing angle they would look extremely thin and therefore do not show up on the low-res picture.
__________________
"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
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 08:54 AM.

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