Another take on the Original Enterprise...

Discussion in 'Fan Art' started by Cary L. Brown, Apr 24, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Cary L. Brown

    Cary L. Brown Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Location:
    Austin, Texas
    What about it? Not sure I understand what you're asking.
     
  2. Albertese

    Albertese Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    May 3, 2003
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    I think he's asking where you plan on putting it. My guess is you're going with the (admittedly muddy) producer's intent that this was all self-contained in the nacelles. Which brings up another point of interest, are you planning n detailing the interior of the nacelles? I'd love to see your take on that hardware.

    --Alex
     
  3. Cary L. Brown

    Cary L. Brown Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Location:
    Austin, Texas
    Well, honestly, part of what I found confusing about the question was that, in this thread (and even on this page) I've already addressed that, at least partially.

    You're correct about what I'm going with (I've said as much, again, on this very page already). I'm not sure why this would be "muddy," though. My personal take is that it's nonsensical to have this sort of hardware inside of the habitable spaces of the ship. Also, Jefferies (as an aerospace guy) was very familiar with where power comes from on aircraft, and was using that model... a model I'm 100% in agreement with.

    The funny thing is that so many people seem to have adopted "post-1988" Trek "technobabble technology" as somehow being reality. We know how the 1701-D was built... because they told us, in tedious detail, how every "self-sealing stem bolt" was used. :rolleyes: None of that is REAL, after all.

    I think this is a better approach. Other people may not agree, but if they don't agree, they're welcome to ignore my project, or to go do their own.
    I do plan to do that, and have quite a bit of it worked out already.

    I'm using much of the concept behind Geoffrey Mandell's old "Warp Drive Blueprint" (though none of the actual detailed arrangement). Somebody familiar with both would be able to see what I've retained from his concept (which, itself, was largely based upon TAS). But yes, the nacelles will be there, and they will have guts.

    EDIT: Here's the old Mandel print, by the way. Again, conceptually, this is much like what I'll have, but in terms of the details, I'll be significantly different.
    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: May 8, 2009
  4. Savage Dragon

    Savage Dragon Savage Mod Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2001
    Location:
    Ottawa, ON
    I am so loving this project! It's giving me an itch to continue on with the Blender tutorial I was doing a while back.
     
  5. Albertese

    Albertese Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    May 3, 2003
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    Oh I'm with you completely. I was was merely giving some room for those guys who insist on clinging to a few odd references such as (but not limited to) "Elaan of Troyius" that seem to put that hardware in the midst of the secondary hull. My personal et arrangement puts all the big reactor stuff in the nacelles with a smaller third reactor near the Engine Room. This too satisfies all the on-screen references. But I think it was Matt's original intent to keep all that business upstairs, my third reactor is to satisfy certain aspects of what is probably from writers not quite getting the concept.

    Anyhow, I'm loving your take on everything here. I look forward to following your progress.

    --Alex
     
  6. USS Mariner

    USS Mariner Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2004
    Location:
    Homestate of Matt Jefferies
    My only complaint so far is your use of the yellow hatch as a general cargo door. Personally, I always though it was linked to the ship's power systems, especially given how Jefferies used the circle markings on the plans for Phase II ship.

    He placed an analogous circular hatch directly underneath where he places the engineering room, and placed two smaller circular hatches on the underside of the nacelles. Given that he always considered the nacelles as actual engines, I can only assume that the use of the hatches implies a connection to the ship's power systems, if not directly to the engines themselves. Given their absence on the original, it may have been an afterthought, but I like the idea.

    EDIT:
    Maybe the writer's inclusion of a third reactor was the reason that Jefferies indicated three hatches on the refit's plans? I doubt that it was the original idea for the hatch to be linked to the ship's power systems, but in retrospect, it doesn't make much sense for a general cargo hatch to have such a specific shape.
     
  7. Cary L. Brown

    Cary L. Brown Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Location:
    Austin, Texas
    But, it's not a "general cargo door."

    In this case, I've adopted what we were shown in TOS-R. This decision grew out of a conversation held in "Trek Tech" on this BBS (see "separate tricorders and communicators.")

    The idea was that you could reconcile the otherwise-nonsensical issue of the Enterprise dropping off hundreds of small satellites in order to kill off the flying-vomit-monsters that ate Kirk's brother, along with some of the inconsistencies involved in communications in Trek in general.

    We decided that a secondary role of the ship would be to "seed" comm satellites as it "goes where no man has gone before." That part is generally not exciting, so it was never really addressed on-screen, of course. In "Operation: Annihilate!" all they had to do was strap on a "sunlamp bulb" to existing satellites, powering the lamp with power which otherwise would be driving a subspace repeater system, and voila... melting rubber vomit.

    In that episode (remastered), we see the satellites being dumped from that port, one at a time. While I strongly dislike the "swing open" doors we were shown, I actually like the general idea.

    Why round? Well, I explain this in an earlier post... that hatch (which, in my version, splits down the middle and retracts to either side, it doesn't swing open!) covers a "carousel" launcher for the satellites. The port is circular because what it covers is circular, in other words.

    So... it's in no way a "general cargo hatch." There is one "general cargo hatch" down there, and that's to the aft (square, white, with red outline). There's another specialized "drop bay" just forward of that (outfittable with various speciality packages... atmosphere-seeding packages, even a "long range shuttlecraft". Forward of that is a reactor access port (but for FUSION reactors, not m/am). And forward of that is the comm-sat deployment hatch. (Forward of THAT will be the tractor beam, by the way...)
    Well, the trick is that any hatch can represent any feature... shape isn't an indicator of function, only of whatever's behind it.

    For instance, in my case, the "T-shaped" hatch is covering three sets of twin fusion reactors, plus a central "hub" carrying their power output upwards.

    I have no problem with there being a reactor in that hull... I've got SIX reactors. They're just fusion reactors, not m/am reactors. And they're immediately adjacent to the exterior, where they can be ejected at a moment's notice if they start to go haywire.

    FYI, that makes a total of twelve identical fusion reactors on my version of this ship... the other six (again, in three sets of two) are clustered around the two "VASIMR"-type impulse engines in the primary hull. These reactors, all together, create what I'm treating as the "auxiliary power system." It's normally running at very low, standby power, but if the main m/am reactor system is down, or if you need more total power available (and thus decide to "lock in the auxiliary power") you can add the full output of these to the total available power.

    I'm discounting the idea that m/am reactors are many orders of magnitude more powerful than fusion reactors. They're more EFFICIENT, sure... but I'd say that the total "auxiliary power" output is probably something in the range of 10% of the total "main power" output. Otherwise... there'd be no reason to add it into the mix during extreme-power-demand situations.
     
  8. Cary L. Brown

    Cary L. Brown Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Location:
    Austin, Texas
    Turbolifts

    I've got the basics of my turbolift system installed now. I adjusted my car design a bit based upon the physical constraints. The cars now have a very shallow floor, and relatively thin walls (which was the case before) but a fairly chunky ceiling section, which houses all the installed electrical and mechanical gear. Here's a basic section of the ship. I've got almost all of the tubes laid out in the secondary hull, but still have to lay things out in the primary hull. (The primary hull has uniform deck-spacing so as long as I'm sure that the heights work, I can lay in tubes without any concern that there will be problems... the secondary hull and dorsal didn't have that luxury, so I had to do those first.)

    [​IMG]

    Here's a closer view of three lift cars stacked up in the tube. Obviously, this is an undesirable situation - the cars at the top are stuck right now. So, in most cases (except at run-termination points) cars park in alcoves off the main tube runs, thereby not blocking transit by other cars.

    [​IMG]

    The dorsal is pretty full of tube runs... unavoidable, unfortunately. There's only one path through the dorsal... but there are four Jeffries tubes (two forward, two aft) plus a ladderway, so there are additional ways to travel between the primary and secondary hulls.

    [​IMG]

    In the secondary hull, there is a full loop, not just a single run, so it would be possible for cars to drive in laps through this "race course." However, I haven't run tubes longitudinally. The reason is pretty simple... walking from one end of the secondary hull to the other would be a short walk. If the crew can't walk from the tube station to wherever they're going, they shouldn't be on duty anyway!

    [​IMG]

    One other thing you'll notice here is that the tubes going to the lowermost region (well, they're not entirely complete, mind you!)... they extend all the way to the hull. I'm going to put (hidden) hatches in those regions... the idea being that when the ship was under construction, interior access was provided by a direct connection from here. While they're not used at this point, some dockyards still have that sort of connection so the tubes remain. Anyway, that's my thought process.

    The primary hull will mainly be the central vertical run (with parking spots off it, of course!), but there will be a "loop" involving decks 5, 6, and 7 as well, to ensure that you can walk through the entire ship without ever being blocked of from another part of the same deck you're currently on.
     
  9. CuttingEdge100

    CuttingEdge100 Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    In truth I think it's rather bizarre to have so much open space in the neck (other than the lifts) considering it would need to be a beefy structure (torsional loads), even more than the warp-nacelles (and they don't have all that much stuff in them)

    Regardless that was how the design was drawn up and I believe Mr. Brown is simply trying to be as true to the original design as possible.


    CuttingEdge100
    Post 947
     
  10. Cary L. Brown

    Cary L. Brown Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Location:
    Austin, Texas
    Well, to be fair, there's not MUCH empty space in the dorsal...

    Realize that the entire leading and trailing edge of the dorsal are massive beam structures. The deck structures in this region are 2' thick. And there will be "rib-work" and wall structure (not currently there) throughout. It's a VERY beefy structure. The only weak point is the interface between this and the saucer... and I'm still thinking about how best to handle that!

    Once I have some wall structures in place (other than those defined already, I mean!) I'm going to do another animated "slice-down-through" view, which will make this a lot more clear. :techman:

    EDIT: Okay, that sounded like a good idea, so I went ahead and did it (even though I don't have much in the way of wall-structures in the secondary hull yet.

    You'll notice the rather massive ship's keel, right in the center of the secondary hull... this is something that nobody's really done previously, but it's central to my concept, and it works quite nicely, I think. Note the long "stem" for the deflector. The general idea is that this is a bank of capacitors... the deflector "charges" and releases its energy as a single massive pulse. The pulse's reflection is then picked up by the concentric rings underneath the dish... that's how it acts as a sensor as well as a deflector. But it's not a "continuous operation" device... it just puts out very powerful pulses at regular intervals.
    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: May 9, 2009
  11. Gagarin

    Gagarin Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2007
    This is like... the ship how I imagined it.
    ;)

    VERY well done with the design work, I'm just in love with the strongback and the structural stuff! From the looks of it the fantail-level of the landing deck is the same level as the keel, which intrigues me. For some reason I've been imagining much of that fantail being part of the keel itself for the longest time - and there you are having it on the same level, although not exactly how I had it in my mind.

    This is crazy.
    I love this project.
    I didn't know you were this talented! I must not have paid attention to your work before!
     
  12. Gagarin

    Gagarin Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2007
    Re: Turbolifts

    Would it help any to have the tubes... run as the crow-flies, along the structural spine of the dorsal, except for the car stops?

    Great idea! I always thought of including a feature like that at Deck 1 - some sort of starbase docking collar at the top so people could get on and off the ship with a turbo-lift. Sure beats cumbersome gangways if you're just doing errands back and forth, and it ties into the ship's existing infrastructure and how we regularly see crew moving about. I never thought about the bottom, which seems like a great idea. And I like your construction/dockyard reasoning!
     
  13. Cary L. Brown

    Cary L. Brown Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Location:
    Austin, Texas
    Re: Turbolifts

    I thought about that. However, it's not really consistent with the car/tube designs we've had throughout Trek-nology.

    Had I done that, I'd have had to "tip" the car at the top of the dorsal, and then "untip" it when it's back at the bottom, plus at each level. Now, that might be more practical than the stair-stepping we've got, but as far as I'm concerned it's really a toss-up.

    If I were designing something like this from scratch, I'd probably have spherical "lift cars" rather than cylindrical ones... probably with ring-shaped seating, and quite a bit larger overall than what we've got. Such spherical cars would be able to reorient themselves far more easily than the cylindrical ones we're accustomed to in Trek, and you could have different parts of the ship in different gravity conditions as well without any real problems being introduced.

    (Something to think about for future non-canon designs... or maybe what you'd have on the glimpsed "Enterprise J"?)
    Well, I hadn't planned on this... but when I created that last section of tube, it just seemed totally obvious. By the way, there's still the option for doing this at the bridge lift tube as well... but it seems to me that you don't want to have 100% or so of the traffic in and out of the ship going, essentially, through the most high-security location on the ship. So while there might be a connection from the bridge to "dock control," the main passage used by dockyard crews would likely be the pair at the bottom, and they'd seldom go near the bridge.
     
  14. Santaman

    Santaman Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2001
    Location:
    That Ship
    Incredible work Cary. :techman::cool:
     
  15. ncc-1017-e

    ncc-1017-e Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2001
    Location:
    atlanta georgia unitedstates
    This looks great
     
  16. sbk1234

    sbk1234 Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2006
    Location:
    Los Angeles
  17. Ziz

    Ziz Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2001
    Location:
    NY
    Re: Turbolifts

    Actually, you don't have to tip the car, just make the diagonal tube large enough to keep the car level. Then just have the car cheat forward a bit at each deck for passenger entry/egress.

    [​IMG]
     
  18. Cary L. Brown

    Cary L. Brown Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Location:
    Austin, Texas
    Hi guys... I need a bit of help here...

    I've put in my "landing approach lights" but realized that I don't know the correct colors for the leftmost two lights in the series. I've got the middle, and the two starboard-side lights, but I can't find any references, and can't recall, the correct colors for the two port-side lights.

    Here's what I've got in there right now. But I was just basically GUESSING for the two port ones.
    [​IMG]

    Looking closely, you'll notice that I've done something not on the original model... I've taken a bit of a liberty here, but it makes sense to me. The "liberty" is more clear in this next image, in line mode rather than shaded mode.
    [​IMG]

    What I've done is added three panels to the fantail stern. Since the landing lights are basically stuck on the surface, the only real issue here is having nothing protrude through a light... not a problem.

    Inside of the fantail, you'll find an aft torpedo laucher (at centerline). The panel over it splits down the middle and retracts inside the hull. You'll also find a pair of single-piece retracting panels on either side, which expose aft phaser emitters. (This is a similar approach to what is going on with the primary hull, by the way... the emitters or tubes are normally inside the hull, in pressurized (read "servicable") areas. This also makes the ship less threatening, since it doesn't have exposed, bristling gunports all over. (Obviously, by the time of TMP, the units required a lot less maintenance... and the political advantage of this approach was superseded by the drawback of having additional mechanical complexity!)
     
    Last edited: May 9, 2009
  19. Cary L. Brown

    Cary L. Brown Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Location:
    Austin, Texas
    Re: Turbolifts

    But... if you take that approach... what secures the cars in the tube? The car is not constrained... it could "rattle around" wildly.

    The "tube" concept requires that there be a close fit between the outside of the car and the inside of the tube, with the car being supported and restrained by the tube itself.

    See the problem? If the car is slipping down that slanted region, what's to stop it from doing full 360-degree rotations? What keeps it controlled?

    Is the car you're thinking of an independent, self-powered flying craft? That's the only way that this might work... but then, it's not a "lift car," it's a small shuttlecraft flying inside the ship.

    With the "spherical car" concept the "unconstrained" thing wouldn't be an issue, because regardless of orientation, the car would remain always remain constrained by any cylindrical tube section. The car would have to be able to orient itself (something that these cars don't have to do... that's done by driver coils integrated to the structure, adjacent to the outside wall of the "teflon tube" I've got my cars sliding through right now.

    My cars aren't self-powered. They have some battery power for control functions if main power is lost, though they normally get power through "slip-strips" in the tubes. The car's mechanism consists of a "dumb control terminal" linked into the ship's turbolift traffic control system, a communications subsystem, lighting, partial environmental control (a grav-plate system to supplement the ship's system and to help reduce inertial effects when the car is moving, plus heating/cooling... but using air which is common to the ship, in the lift tubes, not some independent air system for every car!), and a "normally-deployed" brake system, which locks the car into position at docking stations or if main power is lost (just like with modern elevator systems) - the brakes can be retracted only if power is present.

    There are also field devices in the overhead section of the car which interact with the driver coils in the tube structure, allowing the car to be propelled by the tube system through these near-zero-friction tube liners I've already modeled.

    Maybe you've got a different model for how you think that these should work, so please, explain how you keep your cars controlled and how they get from place to place. I'm open to suggestions, but what you've suggested here doesn't work with my current "lift system model." So, what's your alternative model?
     
  20. Ziz

    Ziz Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2001
    Location:
    NY
    I was just looking at the structure of the ship. If you want to get into the mechanics of the car, how about this -

    The tubes have electrified grooved rails in them, the cars have rollers on pins - similar to the way bi-fold closet doors work. Rollers are connected to small motors. Place these at various points on the car's exterior surface or extending on rods from the cars edges. This keeps the car in the correct orientation and the contact between the rails and rollers becomes a natural electrical connection, meaning the cars don't need an onboard power source.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.