Another fan attempt at TOS deck plans

Discussion in 'Fan Art' started by Shaw, Feb 11, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Shaw

    Shaw Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2007
    Location:
    Twin Cities
    So looking at the reactions here have me wondering if maybe I'm going in the wrong direction. Would you guys actually be happier with something more like a manual (book type of thing) than a handful of sheets? There is tons of information here that might be better addressed in that format than just fitting it all onto a few 24" x 36" sheets.

    Thoughts?


    I saw in another thread that someone didn't believe that the dorsal had much in the way of room to offer, so I quickly supplemented one of my earlier sketches of the dorsal decks with this idea for an Officer's Club on Deck 9 (to match up with a string of windows on the dorsal)...

    [​IMG]

    And I included an example restaurant which seats quite a few more people in a much smaller footprint as a sort of proof of concept.

    Anyways, it is amazing the amount of space in the dorsal that is so often overlooked.
     
  2. FalTorPan

    FalTorPan Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2000
    Location:
    Out there... thataway.
    What I like about the booklet idea is that it would better document some of your design process, as well as your actual design. As you know there have been many attempts to map out the Big E, and over time, the reasons behind each attempt's various design choices become lost.

    I have a variety of design ideas for my own take at a Big E layout. Whether those ideas ever come to fruition in a tangible form, I would try to document the reasons behind the design, so that years later -- assuming anyone still gives a crap about the designs -- they can get some idea of what craziness I was thinking at the time. :p

    Another thing I like about the booklet idea is that it's unique. To my knowledge, no one else has done anything like this, so by default, your ideas would get a degree of attention that few others would enjoy.
     
  3. Cary L. Brown

    Cary L. Brown Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Location:
    Austin, Texas
    My only problem with what you've shown here (which is otherwise quite well-presented) is that I'm absolutely certain that the dorsal would need a LOT of mechanical structure inside of it. It can't just be a "tin can" with all of the internal structure available.

    That said... your idea can still work. I just think that you need to add more, and heavier, internal structure there. That, also, from your example can be demonstrated to be worthwhile.

    The tables you're using there, also as demonstrated in your example, are actually quite a bit larger than is necessary for the application you're presenting.

    Beef up the structure in this area and I'd definitely buy off on your concept.
     
  4. FalTorPan

    FalTorPan Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2000
    Location:
    Out there... thataway.
    Another example you could draw from would be a railroad dining car. :)
     
  5. aridas sofia

    aridas sofia Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 3, 2002
    I disagree about the need for extensive structure, Cary. This thing can be a semi-monocoque structure, with the main framework lying deep within the saucer and secondary hull. That framework might have little to do with reinforcing the shape against momentum shifts under normal operating conditions. Reinforced hull structures made of exotic materials might do that work, while deep framing might only be there to lend support to the skin under extreme, abnormal stress.

    I'd include some minor structure towards that end in the neck, as well as some redundant connections between secondary hull's main fuel sources and primary hull reactors. I'd also suggest a second turboshaft to clear that tight traffic spot between the two hulls. Otherwise, I agree completely with using the remaining neck for FJ-like public spaces. I'd also include VIP quarters (for special environments needs) and even temporary berthing for crew working in the upper secondary hull.
     
  6. USS Mariner

    USS Mariner Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2004
    Location:
    Homestate of Matt Jefferies
    Huh, I didn't think the neck had that much room, though that doesn't appear to be the true contour of the dorsal (Not that it would severely affect the concept, of course.)

    I really wish my portable hard drive wasn't currently "dead" right now. I had just transfered 20gb of my work onto there a few months ago, and my own 1701 deckplans were on there. :mad:
     
  7. doctorwho 03

    doctorwho 03 Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2005
    Location:
    In my TARDIS
    Nice looking officer's club.:techman:

    A booklet of sorts would definately be a good direction to take this project. Something along the lines of "Mr. Scott's Guide to the Enterprise", with detailed descriptions of what's on each deck and images of individual rooms we have seen and maybe one or two rooms we haven't, which would make it easier for people to use their imagination to fill in the blanks.
     
  8. Reverend

    Reverend Vice Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2002
    Location:
    UK
    I think PDF format booklet would be favourite for stuff like the above and a separate set of sheets could be used for the actual deck plans - especially if you're going with the "fill in the blanks" concept. So basically the same format as Sternbach's E-D blueprints; little booklet for the preface and the details and an accompaniment to the actual deck plans.

    As for the officers club idea, I have to add my disagreement that the structure here is too insubstantial. there's plenty of volume on the fore and aft compartments to accommodate the major structural members and still leave room for the various conduits that'd run between the hulls. EPS, ODN, life support, water, Deuterium for the impulse reactors, even some GNDN's. ;)
     
  9. Bernard Guignard

    Bernard Guignard Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2005
    Location:
    Ontario
    Great work on the officers Club Shaw. Is the head on deck 10 ? (Grin) Keep it up
    looking forward to Booklet and Plans. Take care
     
  10. Cary L. Brown

    Cary L. Brown Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Location:
    Austin, Texas
    I think maybe you're exagerating the point I was trying to make, Aridas. I wasn't saying that it needs to be a complete solid trusswork inside. But monocoque structures require both a skin and a "stringer network" to help it maintain its rigidity, after all!

    What I was suggesting would be more along the lines of having the interior spaces "ribbed" fairly heavily. For instance, you might have three-foot ribbed structures coming out from the walls every six feet or so, with the tables arranged BETWEEN them... so that they'd serve as a sort of semi-partitioning structure (think restaurant booths). And those structures wouldn't have to be SOLID, they could be "webbed" wall segments.

    Similarly, you might have pillar-like structures in the central portions of the spaces. And "archway" like structures along the ceilings joing it all together (much as we've seen in the TOS corridor sets, but a bit deeper).

    Clearer?
     
  11. aridas sofia

    aridas sofia Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 3, 2002
    ^ Absolutely. And that is exactly the kind of thing I was writing about, and portrayed in my own depiction of the neck. Though I portrayed a diagonal gridwork tied together with horizontal "stringers" that served, if I understand you correctly, the purpose you allot to your "ribbing".
     
  12. ncc-1017-e

    ncc-1017-e Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2001
    Location:
    atlanta georgia unitedstates
    I like this design!
     
  13. Shaw

    Shaw Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2007
    Location:
    Twin Cities
    You're all wrong! Wrong, wrong, wrong! It is either my way or no way at all! :(


    :rolleyes:

    That having been said... if we are talking about supports that are similar to those seen in either the briefing room or cabin sets, then I don't see a problem with that. Those wouldn't seem out of place as they appear in other areas of the ship.

    So a quick modification and a quickly drawn support beam structure (which is in no way the final geometry of them) yields this...

    [​IMG]

    As for the previous image... yes, I know the tables were a little big (it was just to illustrate the idea). And as for the geometry of the dorsal... I'm currently using my 3 foot Enterprise's dorsal as I haven't finished my studies of the 11 foot model yet. But the differences are such that I'm quite comfortable using this dorsal without a loss of generality in these early sketches.

    I like the idea of putting guest/VIP cabins in the dorsal because it adds additional justification for the large amount of windows on the surface.


    Oh... and yes, the restrooms are one deck down. If a turbolift isn't there in an emergency, you can always use the ladder to get down there. :eek:
     
  14. Cary L. Brown

    Cary L. Brown Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Location:
    Austin, Texas
    That's exactly the sort of thing I was talking about!
     
  15. Philo

    Philo Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2005
    Location:
    Montréal
    ^ I can also really appreciate the aesthetic benefits as well. I love when engineering and art can get along like that.
     
  16. Maurice

    Maurice Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Location:
    Walking distance from Starfleet HQ
    I'd imagine that the "spine" of this would have to be more of a conduit trunk, deeper (fore to aft), certainly, than in this (very cool) example.

    My main issue with these plans in that the exterior hull seems so thin, especially given how thick the walls in the actual sets appeared to be.
     
  17. Cary L. Brown

    Cary L. Brown Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Location:
    Austin, Texas
    That's something else. I happen to agree with you, but that topic will turn this thread into a flame-fest. ;-)

    In my ship, I made most of my exterior walls .385 m thick (translated, that's 15 1/8"). That's HUGE by "modern" standards, but I assume that these structures are multi-laminate, filled with both structural and technological components, and so forth. The "wall thickness" is merely the distance between "human-exposed" portions of a big, complex machine, in other words.

    I also used larger wall thicknesses... about .68 m (or 26 3/4")... in some regions which are "heavy load bearing" structures, including much of the exterior hull structure.

    It sounds like a lot, but when you look at it "in scale" it's actually pretty reasonable, and it just so happens to look very much like what we've seen on-screen, to boot. Check it out here:

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    I originally actually wanted THICKER walls but I ended up resolving on this thickness as a good, workable, USEFUL number.
     
  18. Shaw

    Shaw Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2007
    Location:
    Twin Cities
    Well, my first guessimate of the front and rare trunks is best seen in this sketch...

    [​IMG]

    I envision the rear trunk being the main interconnect of the ships engines and power between the two hulls, while the front is a backup mainly used for supporting the secondary hull in the case of warp and impulse engine failure (so that both hulls would be receiving power from the main energizers located on deck 7 in the primary hull). I do have a power distribution and networking sketch, but haven't posted it yet.

    Besides the obvious question (why in the world are you judging these sketches in any where near that detail when not a single drawing seen so far will even be part of the final project?), I will not go against what was seen in TOS for outer hull thickness (currently estimated at about 9 inches... but I haven't completed my studies of the issue as yet so I've made no attempt to display hull thickness in any accurate sense)...

    [​IMG]

    ... so if you want something thicker than what was seen in TOS, that falls into the do-it-yourself category. If you want something thinner (like Pike's cabin in The Menagerie remastered), that too would have to be a do-it-yourselfer.

    But right now, I'm still working on an outline of the internal arrangements... there are (currently) no plans to speak of. Just sketches of ideas that are being considered for the future plans. If you are attempting to nail down a detail on a sketch which was not directly concerned with that detail, then you ventured off the path of the topic.

    Please remember that everything so far is just a sketch. Would it be better if I did hand drawings? I want the ideas readable, but it seems like people are mistaking brainstorming for something that I currently don't have time to even start (less than worry about making sure that everything I am putting down in a sketch is accurate to within a fraction of an inch). :eek:


    So as a general note to people... if you are overly concerned with the geometry of the ship not being absolutely perfect right now or that the hull thickness isn't what you think it should be, then you guys need to take a few steps back and remember that these are just sketches of concepts... and nothing more. In a lot of places I am using elements from things like my 3 foot Enterprise plans to fill in the blanks because I wasn't even 10% into my studies of the 11 foot model, and I really don't want to use anyone else's plans of the Enterprise for this project (though at first glance the 2.0 version of Casimiro's plans are quite nice).
     
  19. dougkeenan

    dougkeenan Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2006
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    Thassa really, really cool work.
     
  20. Shaw

    Shaw Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2007
    Location:
    Twin Cities
    How thick do things need to be? Where does strength come from?

    I think everyone should try this experiment... take a 8.5" x 11" sheet of paper, roll it (length wise) into a tube that is about 1.5" in diameter. With a single long piece of tape, tape down the outer edge of the paper to itself.

    Now, stand it on end and put a 18 oz. cup of water on it.

    Most people don't realize that you can substitute geometry for raw strength when building things. And solid thickness isn't better than something hollow in most cases. Why do builders use boxed frames or "I" beams rather than solid pieces of metal of the same thickness?

    As it turns out, surface tension and geometry can be more important than the internal strength of a material (like the piece of paper in the experiment above).
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.