The upside-down Enterprise

Discussion in 'Star Trek - Original Series' started by TrickyDickie, Jan 11, 2013.

  1. Robert Comsol

    Robert Comsol Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2012
    Location:
    USS Berlin
    "There she is..." I think this one is definitely the design inspiration for the USS Reliant in ST II which then gave birth to the design of the USS Grissom which, IMHO, is the evolutionary link between Enterprise and Reliant

    (unfortunately nobody wants to listen to this theory, mind read my 9 page theory treatise...:rolleyes:)

    Bob

    P.S.
    Just last week I read the anecdote Albertese was quoting. I think it was from the Star Trek Sketchbook.
     
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2013
  2. Wingsley

    Wingsley Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2007
    Location:
    Wingsley
    Or perhaps you could look at the Connie as just an upside-down version of Matt Jefferies' earlier concept drawings. :techman:
     
  3. Mytran

    Mytran Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2009
    Location:
    North Wales
    Well I did finally get round to reading your Oberth essay, and found it very interesting! I particularly like your approach to using the saucer module, a much more believable solution than other ones I've seen, such as using tiny turbolifts to slide down the pylons. Why, oh why....
     
  4. Robert Comsol

    Robert Comsol Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2012
    Location:
    USS Berlin
    @ Mytran

    Thanks for the kind words. Since I suggested the Oberths' saucer module's undeniable similarity with the Jupiter 2 from "Lost in Space" to be a deliberate hint that we are looking at an older design, maybe I should publish my essay in the current Star Trek / Lost in Space thread? :D

    Bob
     
  5. Metryq

    Metryq Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2013
    Moment arms? Maybe that only applies to rockets and not starships with artificial gravity and inertial damping fields. "Warp engines the size of walnuts" would present a problem, otherwise.
     
  6. Tiberius

    Tiberius Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2005
    Relative to what?
     
  7. JarodRussell

    JarodRussell Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2009
    When you're in orbit, it's the orbital plane, when you approach a planet, it's the ecliptic plane, when you're in the galaxy, it's the galactic plane, when two spacecraft meet, they're going to settle for one coordinate system as well. Point is, there is ALWAYS an Up defined. Otherwise you couldn't navigate properly.

    And if you have a single spaceship, then Up is simply where the ceilings are. And nobody would design a spaceship with an interior where there is no recognizable up and down, because humans would go crazy. Every module of the ISS has a ceiling and a floor, despite zero gravity.
     
  8. diankra

    diankra Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    Actually, they did. The MDA section of Skylab was deliberately designed with no up or down, and consoles on any surface they would fit, in contrast to the more conventional design of the main section, so NASA could see which approach suited the crew best. As 8 of the 9 Skylab astronauts preferred the up-down approach, that's the one that's been used ever since.
     
  9. Metryq

    Metryq Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2013
    Where, exactly, is the "orbital plane" around Earth? Is it over the equator, while all highly "inclined" orbits are illegal? Uranus has an axial tilt of 97 degrees—should one orbit in the ecliptic, or based on the local rotation of the planet? For that matter, why should vessels in the same orbit have the same attitude?

    Suppose another ship of the fleet is approaching from zenith or nadir, thus making its plane of reference along that line of flight. What's the proper etiquette in that situation? Should the ship reaching the rendezvous point second reorient (for no useful reason I can imagine) just to be polite, or should the first ship tumble around to make the arrival feel more welcome?

    To paraphrase Doc Brown, "You're just not thinking three-dimensionally!"

    Keep in mind that these are starships designed for crossing unimaginably vast distances. While delicate maneuvering around spacedock may be possible, why would ships meeting in deep space even get close enough for naked eye visibility? Their communication (including transporters) is effective without having to rub elbows.

    Don't confuse navigational conventions with the attitude of the ship. Heck, every 3D artist knows there are global and local coordinates.
     
  10. anh165

    anh165 Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2012
    Something discomforting about an upside down image of the Enterprise. I think I will need to lay down.
     
  11. ZapBrannigan

    ZapBrannigan Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2013
    Location:
    New York State
    In theory, the Enterprise's markings/decals should be the only thing that looks out of place when the model is upside down, because it's an entirely fictional spacecraft architecture. But we're so conditioned to see it one way, and so invested in the beauty of that way, that it looks crazy upside down.
     
  12. scotpens

    scotpens Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2009
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    The TOS Enterprise was designed to look uniquely futuristic while creating a subliminal impression of a majestic 18th-century sailing ship. Upside down, it looks like something some kid put together with Tinkertoys.
     
  13. Maurice

    Maurice Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Location:
    Walking distance from Starfleet HQ
    Regarding "planes" it's easy to "proceed from a false assumption." No one's saying a ship has to approach on a particular plane. For all we know "standard orbit" is a polar one that lets the ship eventually pass over the entire surface of the planet.
     

Share This Page