TOS Enterprise Shuttle Storage?

Discussion in 'Trek Tech' started by Auroratrek, Feb 16, 2010.

  1. blssdwlf

    blssdwlf Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Since I'm modeling the entire ship, I'm thinking it might make more sense for me to start a thread in the "fan art" section as that seems more appropriate?
     
  2. blssdwlf

    blssdwlf Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    I think a wishful nod to the "Enemy Within" when CBS did TOS-R would've been a throwaway scene of the hangar deck converted for some other purpose (and thus no shuttles). The in-universe explanation that Kirk didn't send shuttles to pick up Sulu was because of the SF Annual Bowling Tournament :lol:
     
  3. Mytran

    Mytran Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2009
    Location:
    North Wales
    Love it - another Trek Mystery solved!
     
  4. Warped9

    Warped9 Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2003
    Location:
    Brockville, Ontario, Canada
    This is freakin' cool! I had always assumed we were always seeing the entrance to the flight deck (often referred to as the Hangar Deck) and yet we could actually have been seeing the entrance to the actual Hangar Deck.

    This is gold!
     
  5. Timo

    Timo Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2003
    A general point regarding the sets associated with shuttlecraft operations:

    All the doorways and corridors depicted in the screencaps upthread seem to extend quite a bit beyond the outer walls of the shuttle facility that can be glimpsed through these doorways. That is, there's a lot of volume between the shuttle holding area and the outer walls of the starship. Now, if those doors and corridors are on the same level as the flight deck, this means the ship is more likely to be over than under thousand feet long...

    ...However, if they are on the same level as the hangar deck, below the flight deck, then it is relatively simple to argue that the hangar deck is a compact space, not nearly as wide or tall as the flight deck. Plenty of corridors could then exist between the outer walls of the hangar and the outer walls of the ship, without a need to assume a larger ship.

    If we want to squeeze the corridors on the same level as the flight deck, we probably have to install them at an angle other than perpendicular to ship centerline. That is, when "JtB" shows a corridor extending away from the shuttlebay, it need not extend to port or to starboard exactly - indeed, it cannot, not if the ship is under a thousand feet long. Rather, it might extend towards the bow of the ship at an acute angle, so that the doorway is set in the forward wall of one of those pocket alcoves, and not in the side wall of such an alcove. The alcoves do suffer from a notable lack of doors that would be visible in the side walls - whereas there does seem to exist a door in the canted forward wall of the longer alcove, at least in some model pics, even though the actual episodes never show this.

    If we don't want to move the corridors to the deck below the flight deck, and don't want to use corridors at odd angles, then we probably have to position the "JtB" doorway at the unseen front wall of the flight deck. The flat greyness on the background would then be the inside of the space doors, and the shuttle would be rotated to face the port wall...

    Timo Saloniemi
     
  6. Mytran

    Mytran Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2009
    Location:
    North Wales
    If the doors were where you suggest, shouldn't we have seen something like this?

    [​IMG]
    (copyright to whoever made this pic, I found it on the web)
     
  7. blssdwlf

    blssdwlf Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Exactly. You'd have to shoot at some unique angles to avoid seeing any of the obs gallery or recessed areas if we try and put JTB or IS on the flight deck, imo.
     
  8. Timo

    Timo Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2003
    That would depend on the framing, now wouldn't it? And that in turn would depend on the perspective of the forced-perspective set. I could see the control booths being framed out left and right, leaving only the inside of the doors - and if that were out of focus, the seams might not show.

    Also, we might postulate that the flight deck features at least two turntables, one at the observed location and another further forward. That'd improve the logistics of the supposed two-deck arrangement, as well as improving our chances of finding suitable angles. A shuttle on the putative forward turntable would probably be visible through a forward wall doorway in a fashion that would frame out the control booths...

    Timo Saloniemi
     
  9. blssdwlf

    blssdwlf Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    That is sorta possible, but the camera would need to be zoomed in tight to crop out the obs decks, etc. The advantage of having JTB and IS down below is that none of the shot scenes need to be altered :)
     
  10. Mytran

    Mytran Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2009
    Location:
    North Wales
    I'm not convinced by the two-turntable solution. It does seem like an odd use of resources and design just to get the shots to line up.
     
  11. blssdwlf

    blssdwlf Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Timo, are you thinking of two turntables on the flight deck or the below deck hangar? If you stop the forward bulkhead of the flight deck at just aft of the nacelles that is really really tight. If you extend it out like I did, you could put two turntables on the flight deck. But as I mentioned before, all the footage that is out there now wouldn't work without some editing as none of the shots are tight enough to crop out any of the structures. (And I've experimented quite a bit with my virtual set.) Or alternatively, a wall is raised between the two turntables which would explain the blank wall behind the shuttle in JTB and TIS.

    But that also adds some complication - how does the shuttle move from one turntable to the other? And how does it fit with what we've seen?

    BTW - Mytran - neat composite picture!
     
    Last edited: Mar 11, 2010
  12. Captain Robert April

    Captain Robert April Vice Admiral Admiral

    Remember, the turntable is also an elevator...
     
  13. blssdwlf

    blssdwlf Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    So two turntables (elevators) ?
     
  14. Mytran

    Mytran Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2009
    Location:
    North Wales
    Credit where its due - and the pic ain't mine! :(
     
  15. Warped9

    Warped9 Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2003
    Location:
    Brockville, Ontario, Canada
    The pic is one of mine I did a couple of years ago. It was part of a very long thread called Never seen TOS scenes.
     
    Last edited: Mar 11, 2010
  16. Timo

    Timo Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2003
    That was the possibility I was promoting - as an alternative to the previous idea of placing all the witnessed "Hanger Deck" action on the deck below the shuttlebay miniature set. After all, that's how aircraft carriers are built, too: there's a large surface, the flight deck, for facilitiating launches and recoveries, but the logistics call for multiple lifts that take the craft to and from that surface.

    It's indeed quite a mystery why the shuttle takeoff and landing area needs to be that big. But both TOS and especially TOS-R give us hints that shuttlecraft operations aren't particularly precise, and that even a standard launch (as seen in TOS-R "The Galileo Seven") would result in the launching craft badly bruising any other craft housed in the same volume. Perhaps the flight deck is so big because shuttles need a lot of space to decelerate at approach, except in the most sedate of situations? Or because there's something analogous to "wind" to complicate flight deck approaches - say, the unpredictable relative movement of the craft and the mothership?

    It's also possible the deck is big simply because it is designed to accept larger auxiliaries on occasion. Say, the gigantic aquashuttle from TAS "Ambergris Element" wouldn't fit aboard at all if the shuttlebay was only sized for economic operation of the Class F craft. And some other auxiliaries or visiting craft may be larger still.

    On the two-lift idea, note how the TMP-refitted ship has elevator surfaces (square, paired, non-rotating) roughly where this putative second turntable would be. Hell, there might be three elevators in TOS already: one central, close to the aft doors, and two farther forward, possibly larger and non-rotating just like in TMP.

    Another idea would be having two lifts/garages side by side at the front end of the flight deck, behind rolling doors. The ST5:TFF set suggests this. In TMP, the garage doors and walls might have been removed, but the actual volume would still be allocated that way. Or the doors and walls might be present even in TMP, but would be moveable, just like some other walls in the secondary hull are shown to be moveable in that movie. Perhaps the differences between TOS, TMP and TFF are actually rather minimal?

    Timo Saloniemi
     
  17. T'Girl

    T'Girl Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Location:
    T'Girl
    Two inline elevators (both with turntables) would make operations easier. A flush with the deck hatch, covering the lowered forward elevator, would account for the second elevator not being seen in the episodes. Two adjacent elevators, working together, could lower a longer shuttle down to the shop deck.

    This could be simular to the blast barriers raised on Navy aircraft carriers before launching a plane.

    It would seem to make sense that the shuttles can in some fashion taxi under their own power.

    Good point.

    The problem with this is that you're beginning to devote a truly large percentage of the secondary hull to flight operations, something the Enterprise does fairly rarely.
     
  18. blssdwlf

    blssdwlf Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    I think I'll play with that idea. I had initially abandoned it because there were no workable camera shots that didn't require some fancy editing (kudos to Warped9) to place (or remove) identifiable features of the flight deck.

    For TOS-R, I thought they royally screwed up by allowing the shuttle to be able to take off on its own from inside the shuttle bay. There are just too many things to hit on the way out and the Enterprise would need to fly a relatively predictable course (or have a tractor beam on the shuttle, which would negate the whole free flight thing.)

    For TOS, it always seemed logical that they emulated (modern) aircraft carrier operations. Those three black rails used to move the shuttle model back and forth I had considered essentially launch and landing rails (like dual purpose catapults and arresting cables.)

    [​IMG]

    On launch, they held the shuttle, accelerated it to the end of the flight deck and released the shuttle allowing it to safely clear the ship (even if the ship was maneuvering.) It would be the reverse for landing. The shuttle would be caught by the rails (assuming some kind of tractor/grav plate technology) and then carried to the elevator. It's along the same lines as the launch/landing rails seen in TMP's SF Command:

    [​IMG]

    I think this makes the most sense. Plus, the size would easily accomodate the larger Galileo 5 shuttlecraft from ST5 and ANY over-sized cargo. The Enterprise could transport anything that could fit through their shuttlebay door (that couldn't be replicated at the destination) making it very useful for hauling stuff to distant colonies (like dispersing chemicals in orbit, etc).

    Compare my "concept TOS long shuttlebay" to Andrew Probert's drawing of the TMP shuttlebay. The TMP shuttlebay (including elevators) is longer than my concept shuttlebay so perhaps having a large shuttlebay isn't so unique as far as this ship class goes?

    [​IMG]

    Yep I noticed that. But also the TMP version had no long wide hallway that connected to it from the front of the ship. All the access seems to come from open corridors that went around the large cargo space. Your idea would work if there weren't any of those pesky scenes from JTB and IS.

    [​IMG]

    I think the main difference between the TOS and TMP versions are the removal of hallways and rooms (and decks) that accessed the shuttle in favor of the large open access cargo area and the addition of a second elevator. It could be analogous to a pre-WW2 carrier with inline elevator having them moved to the sides giving better operational capacity.

    But then again, it doesn't need to be overly complicated since the normal complement is only 4 shuttles ;)
     
  19. blssdwlf

    blssdwlf Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    BTW - good job on that pic :) If TOS or TOS-R had done that it would've rocked.
     
  20. TIN_MAN

    TIN_MAN Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2007
    Don't forget the ST:5 1701-A shuttle bay was much more like the one from the series, so it's logical to conlude that surrounding areas would be much more similar as well (whatever they may be?). Hope this helps?