TOS Enterprise Internals
- Thread starter yotsuya
- Start date
Why walk? I'm lazy; I'd just hop on the turbolift.
That is what the design intends. Either a healthy walk or a turbolift ride.Why walk? I'm lazy; I'd just hop on the turbolift.
From C to D you can cut through the theater lobby, really a wide corridor.
Just so long there isn't a show in progress!
I really like the tiered seating in the theatre BTW - makes very good use of the space and is much more practical as a multi purpose auditorium
As with most shows, the lobby would be empty during the show so it would allow passage for any crew who needed it.
I decided to place it there based on some coincidental factors that were not in any way intentional. First, in lighting the model, they left the port rear top panel unlit and only painted on. Second, the edge ports were never lit on that quarter and they remained the pilot port configuration. When the light the space for CotK, they made it nice and dark - typical for a theater. Plus, with a stage along the bottom of that edge space on Deck 7 (or Deck 6 if you go with fewer than 11 decks in the saucer), seating inboard on the rising section would make sense. Plus, neither version of the ship had anything specified in that area. I also can imagine that the tiny bit of that area in the cutaway poster shows part of the theater lobby. It just seem to be too good a setup to pass up.
And in TMP the reason Kirk called everyone to the rec deck is that the theater is too small to hold that many people. I see it upgraded, but no enough to contain the 400+ of the crew. Just the set of the rec deck held over 200 people for that scene. I'm not sure if in TMP the ship was at full compliment or not since it was launching early, but even 200-300 would only fit in the rec deck (a space I've made even larger so it could hold all 400+ crew in the event the ship was at full compliment).
And I think my saucer decks suffer from an issue. I think I accidentally squished my circle on the first drawing so I think I need to resize them (with a multi-layer master drawing that can be done in 1 step). But nothing would change because of it because all the circles are copies of the first one. This is just a proof-of-concept draft so I can finish the cross section, so I probably won't bother. But if anyone else does, that might be useful information. But I'm not quite finished because I've left the lower decks a bit sparse.
Deck 2 is just the center section (lowered if the bridge lowers, which it does after the Pilot version and stays that way in the movies). It is dedicated to bridge functions. Under it in the center of deck 3 is the top of the control column that includes the ship's computer. The rest of deck 3 is science labs in TOS and rec area in TMP. Decks 8 and 9 are divided. The front of Deck 9 basically doesn't exist. Just machinery needed for the rec deck above (the airlock deck in TMP). The back of Deck 9 is for small cargo. The back of deck 8 is laundry and galley. The front of TOS deck 8 is the rec deck (likely location of the briefing room turned rec room) and entertainment center. Just what that entails is not expounded upon. We got a glimpse of the entertainment area in one novel where they had adapted a 2D TV image to a 3D hologram. If the TOS Ent had any holodeck, this is where it would probably be. The rec area might be more like the botanical garden of the TMP Enterprise or like the rec deck of the TMP Enterprise, or some mix thereof. All I have in that area is a corridor connecting the two turbolifts servicing that area.
I decided to place it there based on some coincidental factors that were not in any way intentional. First, in lighting the model, they left the port rear top panel unlit and only painted on. Second, the edge ports were never lit on that quarter and they remained the pilot port configuration. When the light the space for CotK, they made it nice and dark - typical for a theater. Plus, with a stage along the bottom of that edge space on Deck 7 (or Deck 6 if you go with fewer than 11 decks in the saucer), seating inboard on the rising section would make sense. Plus, neither version of the ship had anything specified in that area. I also can imagine that the tiny bit of that area in the cutaway poster shows part of the theater lobby. It just seem to be too good a setup to pass up.
And in TMP the reason Kirk called everyone to the rec deck is that the theater is too small to hold that many people. I see it upgraded, but no enough to contain the 400+ of the crew. Just the set of the rec deck held over 200 people for that scene. I'm not sure if in TMP the ship was at full compliment or not since it was launching early, but even 200-300 would only fit in the rec deck (a space I've made even larger so it could hold all 400+ crew in the event the ship was at full compliment).
And I think my saucer decks suffer from an issue. I think I accidentally squished my circle on the first drawing so I think I need to resize them (with a multi-layer master drawing that can be done in 1 step). But nothing would change because of it because all the circles are copies of the first one. This is just a proof-of-concept draft so I can finish the cross section, so I probably won't bother. But if anyone else does, that might be useful information. But I'm not quite finished because I've left the lower decks a bit sparse.
Deck 2 is just the center section (lowered if the bridge lowers, which it does after the Pilot version and stays that way in the movies). It is dedicated to bridge functions. Under it in the center of deck 3 is the top of the control column that includes the ship's computer. The rest of deck 3 is science labs in TOS and rec area in TMP. Decks 8 and 9 are divided. The front of Deck 9 basically doesn't exist. Just machinery needed for the rec deck above (the airlock deck in TMP). The back of Deck 9 is for small cargo. The back of deck 8 is laundry and galley. The front of TOS deck 8 is the rec deck (likely location of the briefing room turned rec room) and entertainment center. Just what that entails is not expounded upon. We got a glimpse of the entertainment area in one novel where they had adapted a 2D TV image to a 3D hologram. If the TOS Ent had any holodeck, this is where it would probably be. The rec area might be more like the botanical garden of the TMP Enterprise or like the rec deck of the TMP Enterprise, or some mix thereof. All I have in that area is a corridor connecting the two turbolifts servicing that area.
I don't suppose you have the TOS version of this do you?And since I haven't posted it before, here is the cutaway (with all the callouts) poster. Forgive the creases, it is 40 years old after all.
No, I do not. And for this project I couldn't use it anyway.
I have decided how to fill the space on the upper part of this page. I'm going to insert portions of the deck plans for the major sets. I already have the bridge and the actual set plan, but I'm going to make detailed drawings of certain sections, such as the three decks of the engineering hanger area, quarters (including a plan view of my interpretation of the bathroom), sickbay, auxiliary control, the transporter room, and the briefing room. I also found some good photographs from the 92 restoration of the original engine and pylon grilles (the replacement engine grilles had a completely different hole pattern). And while you can't see it, the above drawing does have that (it is a vector drawing so if I increased the scale you would be able to see it).
May I say that I cannot express how strongly I approve of the basic goal of this project.
No offense to blssdwlf et al. intended, but it seems to me that taking on a layout project then abandoning the canonical length at the first signs of trouble invariably undercuts the project, nullifying the otherwise-glorious result. Similarly, dismissing the concept of a refit altogether makes no sense to me.
More to the point, referencing internal set heights as cause to do so is basically like taking the shuttlecraft interior set and dismissing the full-size exterior shots, Kirk's comment on the shuttle's 24-foot length, et cetera. We know the shuttle interior is too tall . . . why are the tall walls on the ceilingless ship interior sets a shock?
Now, lest I seem too glowing with praise, I'll simply say . . . are there things I'd consider doing differently if this was my design? Maybe.
The turbolift heading straight down the windowed neck section utterly kills me. I'd have it take the diagonal at the front of the interconnecting dorsal and, if it even needs to access one or more neck decks, merely have a tip-upright notch, which strikes me as volumetrically efficient enough.
(Those decks are tiny anyway . . . at 12-13ft wide we're basically talking about something a foot or so more narrow than a single-wide trailer in the US, albeit longer at maybe a hundred feet, and we haven't even considered structural support. So, some of those decks may only be accessible by stairwell/ladder without great operational impact. Of course, having such a stairwell/ladder that doesn't contradict turbolift access may be a trick in and of itself, though at least that could be done taking up only a portion of the deck width.)
The saucer undercut could certainly allow for a tall 'main saucer deck' in some areas, covering at least some instances of too much observable set height on a saucer deck anyway.
And, opening up the project by following the Drexler hull-markings-equals-access-hatches-equals-main-part-locations thesis results in an unsatisfying location for engineering and the diagonal tube structures, given the seeming logic of them being en route to the nacelles (and as suggested in ENT). I haven't fully reviewed the placements but I'd probably try to do something diagonal if possible, or just go with something completely different than the blown-hatch theory. For instance, a normally protected drop-down set of shunting conduits that blow whatever particular dangerous contents into space (e.g. antimatter) would allow non-vertical placement options (i.e. not directly above the hatch), or simply following the diagonal Jefferies tube shape Scotty would have to go play in.
But, the point is, there are plenty of ways to do the ship to the right size, and I'm glad to see someone going against the rescaling kick so popular here.
She's a beauty, she's your beauty, and you should take the utmost pride in the work done so far and the work yet to come.
Thank you!
No offense to blssdwlf et al. intended, but it seems to me that taking on a layout project then abandoning the canonical length at the first signs of trouble invariably undercuts the project, nullifying the otherwise-glorious result. Similarly, dismissing the concept of a refit altogether makes no sense to me.
More to the point, referencing internal set heights as cause to do so is basically like taking the shuttlecraft interior set and dismissing the full-size exterior shots, Kirk's comment on the shuttle's 24-foot length, et cetera. We know the shuttle interior is too tall . . . why are the tall walls on the ceilingless ship interior sets a shock?
Now, lest I seem too glowing with praise, I'll simply say . . . are there things I'd consider doing differently if this was my design? Maybe.
The turbolift heading straight down the windowed neck section utterly kills me. I'd have it take the diagonal at the front of the interconnecting dorsal and, if it even needs to access one or more neck decks, merely have a tip-upright notch, which strikes me as volumetrically efficient enough.
(Those decks are tiny anyway . . . at 12-13ft wide we're basically talking about something a foot or so more narrow than a single-wide trailer in the US, albeit longer at maybe a hundred feet, and we haven't even considered structural support. So, some of those decks may only be accessible by stairwell/ladder without great operational impact. Of course, having such a stairwell/ladder that doesn't contradict turbolift access may be a trick in and of itself, though at least that could be done taking up only a portion of the deck width.)
The saucer undercut could certainly allow for a tall 'main saucer deck' in some areas, covering at least some instances of too much observable set height on a saucer deck anyway.
And, opening up the project by following the Drexler hull-markings-equals-access-hatches-equals-main-part-locations thesis results in an unsatisfying location for engineering and the diagonal tube structures, given the seeming logic of them being en route to the nacelles (and as suggested in ENT). I haven't fully reviewed the placements but I'd probably try to do something diagonal if possible, or just go with something completely different than the blown-hatch theory. For instance, a normally protected drop-down set of shunting conduits that blow whatever particular dangerous contents into space (e.g. antimatter) would allow non-vertical placement options (i.e. not directly above the hatch), or simply following the diagonal Jefferies tube shape Scotty would have to go play in.
But, the point is, there are plenty of ways to do the ship to the right size, and I'm glad to see someone going against the rescaling kick so popular here.
She's a beauty, she's your beauty, and you should take the utmost pride in the work done so far and the work yet to come.
Thank you!
Well, two of my main sources are The Making of Star Trek and the TMP cutaway poster. There is a thread of agreement that goes from TMoST to Franz Josef's plans, to TMP. That follows a different path from Matt Jefferies two cross sections (the TOS one also found in TMoST and the Phase II one) which do not follow the same deck layout, but are my main sources for where things are located. I placed engineering according to Jefferies and checked out every options with similar placement for ideas, eventually coming up with something unique based on what Jefferies had drawn. Drexler has these weird crossed pipes as part of the main power and I turned the pipes into more of a power transformer with the real warp hardware under the deck and behind the back wall, hidden from view (supported by what we see in the few episodes that show anything).
And there is no spare room to raise the decks. I have to above the Transporter Room, but to squeeze in 11 decks in the saucer as TMoST dictates, I already have to drop the ceiling on the bottom 3 decks from 8 to 7 feet. The forward half of deck 8 I did give a higher deck height because it has to be that to match TMP's airlock. And the TMP cutaway poster not only forces 8 foot decks on decks 4 to 7, but provides a corridor/room layout that fits the TOS quarters set beautifully. I have reconsidered some of the placements on deck 7. They moved sickbay for TMP, so maybe other things on that deck were moved as well. The question is whether the transporter machinery should be above or below the room. Sternbach put it below in his Ent D plans.
Basically the internal structure is a puzzle and figuring out what sources help me put it together has been an interesting challenge. I'm glad to hear my work is appreciated.
And there is no spare room to raise the decks. I have to above the Transporter Room, but to squeeze in 11 decks in the saucer as TMoST dictates, I already have to drop the ceiling on the bottom 3 decks from 8 to 7 feet. The forward half of deck 8 I did give a higher deck height because it has to be that to match TMP's airlock. And the TMP cutaway poster not only forces 8 foot decks on decks 4 to 7, but provides a corridor/room layout that fits the TOS quarters set beautifully. I have reconsidered some of the placements on deck 7. They moved sickbay for TMP, so maybe other things on that deck were moved as well. The question is whether the transporter machinery should be above or below the room. Sternbach put it below in his Ent D plans.
Basically the internal structure is a puzzle and figuring out what sources help me put it together has been an interesting challenge. I'm glad to hear my work is appreciated.
When this project is " completed" will deck plans be available?
Complete deck plans... no. Right now deck plans are more of a sketch to help with the cross section. I don't have the inclination to create all the quarters and other redundant rooms. I'm only interested in the core. I have changed my plans and I will be including the major sets in set of deck vignettes.
Well, the TMP refit has 2 of those and the TOS and Excelsior don't have any obvious airlocks.... but I'm not going to deal with that. I'm not doing full deck plans.
There are those various rectangular panels on the underside of the saucer - possible airlock hatches?
There are also some on the top of the saucer near the impulse engines and that group on the bottom of the secondary hull (which in my plans are for the anti-matter, intermix chamber, cargo, and tractor beam). There are plenty of places to put airlocks provided they can be concealed.There are those various rectangular panels on the underside of the saucer - possible airlock hatches?
