TOS Enterprise WIP

Discussion in 'Fan Art' started by blssdwlf, Apr 24, 2010.

  1. blssdwlf

    blssdwlf Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Just a quick glance - it looks like the dorsal is narrower than the skegs as seen in TMP so wouldn't that put the max dorsal width at whatever the actual skegs width minus the spacing? So it'd still be some unknown feet less than 28'.

    And of course, Merry Christmas to all!
     
  2. Mytran

    Mytran Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2009
    Location:
    North Wales
    Comparing the skeg and the dorsal widths, there's a gradiating difference as we progress from aft to fore. As the dorsal is irregular in shape, the skeg is likely straight. Towards the fore, the widths are very close.

    Ho ho ho to all!
     
  3. Maurice

    Maurice Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Location:
    Walking distance from Starfleet HQ
    Happiness has no bearing on this. I'm merely interested in accuracy in attributions.
     
  4. Tallguy

    Tallguy Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    May 2, 2005
    Location:
    Beyond the Farthest Star
    DING! DING! DING! (It's a machine that goes... DING!) We have a WINNER!

    Ok, you can argue (and BOY can you/we argue!) that the TMP large section was created by the same FX team and the DE wasn't. And the other was ILM working on the Wrath of F'ing KHAN (a good thing to many many people).

    BUT! Is anyone going to argue this baby? http://movies.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/tmp2/tmphd2529.jpg Original FX team and all that...

    (Ok, WHY is the original and obviously WRONG matte painting soooo much more impressive looking than the DE version with the almost real Enterprise?!?)
     
  5. Maurice

    Maurice Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Location:
    Walking distance from Starfleet HQ
    ^^^Because the matte painting has a MOOD, which the DE version utterly lacks.
     
  6. Robert Comsol

    Robert Comsol Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2012
    Location:
    USS Berlin
  7. blssdwlf

    blssdwlf Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    This whole line of thinking has been bugging me for a while now I see why. Bob, you're referencing Kimble's and Big Jim Slade's blueprints but you appear to be avoiding a direct measurement of the dorsal width.

    Pulling out my printed Kimble blueprint, the dorsal width of the Enterprise as measured (width of dorsal / width of saucer) is: 0.038 x 141.7m = 5.47m or 17.9' wide. Multiply that by 1.1639 to increase to a 355m ship and the width is 6.36m or 20.8' wide for the dorsal.

    Big Jim Slade's Enterprise dorsal width is wider: 0.049 x 141.7m = 6.95m or 22.8' wide. Multiple that by 1.1639 and the width is 8.09m or 26.5'.

    So Kimble's is narrower than you'd like and Slade's is closer to what you prefer. :)
     
  8. Robert Comsol

    Robert Comsol Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2012
    Location:
    USS Berlin
    :confused: My English must be worse than I'd like to believe.

    I only relied on Kimble's and Big Jim Slade's stern views of the saucer (diameter size figures supposedly undisputed) to arrive at a workable "real-life" width of the impulse engines' exhaust nozzles.

    Next, I relied exclusively on the actual stern view images. It's easy to calculate the width of the skegs (and the dorsal in that area) based on the width of the impulse engines' exhaust nozzles.

    Since the outermost port and starboard edges of these exhaust nozzles are actually closer to the camera / viewer than the skegs, the area between the skegs is at least 8.5 meters / 27.9 feet wide.

    This has nothing to do with preference.

    Preference would be assuming that the skegs are not just parallel to one another but follow a basic ovoid / convex shape of the dorsal which reaches a wider point below the impulse deflection crystal...and possibly wide enough to accomodate both an impulse engine room and an engine core tower that would look something like this:

    [​IMG]

    Bob
     
  9. blssdwlf

    blssdwlf Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    And that's the head scratcher. So you relied on Kimble's and BJSlade's blueprints to derive a width for the impulse engine nozzles then you switch over to photographs with perspective distortion to derive a width of the skegs to get you a width of the dorsal.

    Why didn't you just directly measure the width of the dorsal from the blueprints? Or only rely exclusively on the photos? Instead you've now made your analysis complicated with uncertainty from different and varying degrees of accuracy sources.

    Oh and btw, the measured dorsal width of the DE Enterprise is 0.042 x 141.7m = 5.97m or 19.5'. Multiply for a 355m ship and that comes to 6.95m or 22.8'. It's in between the Kimble and BJS blueprints.
     
  10. Shat Happens

    Shat Happens Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2013
    Interesting. This concept of shuttered windows could be used to explain the front-facing windows in the room with the steering wheel (and emergency transmitter) from STV.
     
  11. kennysmith

    kennysmith Lieutenant Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2013
    Location:
    sacramento ca
    i am to let you all to know that i will be offline as of dec-30-2013 at 12:oo noon/pm
    and i will not have my laptop with me. i know please tell other this. i will be back some time in feb-2014? i hope. nice trying to get the info i need i will have my cell phone i can't answer but i can only look. GOOD BUY FOR NOW.
     
  12. blssdwlf

    blssdwlf Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    I dunno. Your preference seems to be only data that supports a wide enough dorsal to fit that vertical shaft through it ;)
     
  13. blssdwlf

    blssdwlf Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Yeah, that's pretty much one of two in-universe options. Shuttered windows or the steering wheel room used virtual screens to simulate windows.
     
  14. bigjimslade

    bigjimslade Ensign Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2009
    I am in the airport with a delay, looking for things to do, so I popped in. This may be letting out the magician's tricks but . . . It's all a matter of art.

    I found conflicting information on the saucer diameter (among other things). Some gave it as 46-1/2". Others gave it as 46-3/4". One person told me that it was supposed to be 46-1/2" and overshot in construction. In any event, I tried both and I ended up using 46-3/4" (going from memory here--but I know its the 3/4 not 1/2).

    The actual width of the impulse engine as I have it is less scientific than you might imagine. There is a circle of an even radius at an even offset with a tangent line to a point an at even offsets that defines the basic shape.

    The final width come from chopping the block at various angles. The width comes from the chopping. That becomes one of the areas of odd measurement. The angles come from a lot of eyeballing and trial-and-error. I have the advantage of doing this in 3D so I can see the effect different changes have. I know that I have done some tweaking of those angles since the first version of the plans.

    I don't have/never had access to the original model. There are basic measurements of a lot of things (e.g. length, saucer diameter, warp engine length, diameter, engineering hull length) that I use. But the sources often conflict and how accurate are they? I use the length 100". Is the 100-inch studio model exactly 100"?--we work within our limitations.

    I base everything off of round sizes and offsets. In most cases I go no lower than 1/16" (in a few places 1/32"). For very small details (e.g. grid lines), I might go down to multiples of 0.01". Lengths defined by angles do have odd values.

    It would be silly for me to make a part precisely 11.00274" wide when I am largely working off of photographs.

    The bottom line, is all of this is done to be close enough for government work.

    Furthermore, the raster images give up a lot of detail and accuracy. There are things that look like angles in the images that come out as curves when printed full size.

    I have generated a new set of plans. The only dramatic difference is in the hangar door. However, this one contains measurements of all kinds of things to take the guess work out. It also expands to 15 sheets (from 8).
     
  15. JJohnson

    JJohnson Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Location:
    Jacksonville, FL
    Keep up the good work on this! It's always good to see the original Enterprise online.

    As a brief aside, how would you take the original Enterprise and 'modernize' the interiors, such as the corridors and engineering, without putting a brewery in the engineering hull? Would you put in a vertical or horizontal intermix chamber?
     
  16. blssdwlf

    blssdwlf Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Thanks :)

    Modernize the TOS E? I probably wouldn't change anything they did when they upgraded it for TMP because I'm a fan of the TMP E...

    Hypothetically, I'd say Voyager's sets would work as a modern version as they had the "wide" corridors like the TOS sets so probably something Voyager-esque.
     
  17. Mytran

    Mytran Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2009
    Location:
    North Wales
    I had a similar thought when musing on the TMP sets recently. If as we are told in the novel this was supposed to be how the ST Universe "really" looked all along (with TOS an in-universe dramatization based on the Captain's logs), then how would the TOS-E really have looked?

    The TOS-E corridors certainly took a lot of flak back in the day for the being unnaturally wide. TMP tried to soften this by inserting the K-beams on the 8' width, leading to actual walkways of around 4' (plus elbow room). For this to represent an "improvement" over the original, the TOS corridors could not have been larger - I think 4' wide is about right, but with straight walls. In fact, very similar to DS9's Defiant! Or maybe Voyager's Deck 15?

    I think we'd also have to dismiss the bright colour scheme seen throughout the series as well. There is a much more natural progression between the colour scheme in The Cage and that goes for the uniforms too!

    All in all, I am much happier with what we got :)
     
  18. blssdwlf

    blssdwlf Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Very true. Don't forget though that TOS also had the rarely seen 4' wide corridors.
     
  19. Shat Happens

    Shat Happens Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2013
    Is this thread and WIP abandoned? I'd love to see more CGIs of the original Enterprise innards. You know, this thread (which I found via Google while researching for a little CGI proiject of myself) is what made me register in trekbbs.
     
  20. blssdwlf

    blssdwlf Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    @Shat Happens - Not abandoned but more on a break. I had some personal events to take care of so my cgi time is more limited than before. I'll return to it as time permits. Thanks for asking! :D