Is the bridge at a funny angle?

[ZapBrannigan]

I used to wonder if with the segmented bridge set, the turbo was originally intended to be directly behind Kirk's chair but perhaps they changed it for a more visually interesting bank of computer screens.

That reminds me of something F.J. said in a 1982 interview:

But take another type of error which is a major mistake. There are not military vehicles, to my knowledge, that are designed with the commanding officer positioned so he sits with his back to an exposed entry. Yet the captain of the Enterprise sat with his back to the elevator. The reason being, that was where the action of the episode was coming from, and that was the camera angle the producer wanted.

In order to do this, he was shooting at a 36-degree angle to the captain's station and the bridge, so he could include the screen over to the right and the elevator over to the left. When you come to the layout of the bridge, because the elevator is on the centerline of the Enterprise in its external views, you discover the bridge is skewed off 36 degrees from the centerline. But no ST fan ever put these two things together, you don't see it until you try to make an actual layout of the starship.

 

[Ssosmcin]

FJ's plans and the tech manual aren't "canonical" so, nope.
Here's a simple solution that also explains how there can be a fresh car in place seconds after another one leaves:

This pleases me greatly and I will accept this in my own head canon.

 

[BK613]

It appears on screen in TMP close up as V'Ger hacks the Enterprise computer, along with a shot of the offset bridge, so it's as canon as any other on-screen graphic.

Yep, straight out of the FJ Tech Manual (large images):
http://movies.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/tmp2/tmphd1684.jpg
https://www.cygnus-x1.net/links/lcars/blueprints/sftm/01-06-10.jpg

 

[BK613]

Discussion, not argument.

Nay, this is one of those topics where flags are metaphorically planted and hills are metaphorically died upon.

 

[Albertese]

I'm comfortable with both ideas. I've been a Franz Joseph fan since childhood, so the 36* off-set is kinda how it should be in my mind. That said, a gently scaled up ship solves a whole raft of problems so that idea is cool too.

--Alex

 

[Tosk]

Even though I prefer the "outside bump is not lined up with the door" approach, it mostly falls into the area of production quirks that you just shrug off. Like the angle of the shuttlebays on the Ent-D, or prosthetics popping loose during a shot, or rank pip oddities, all that guff.

 

[Forbin]

That is precisely what I want it to be. Did you make this image, Forbin?

Yes, based on a concept by John Zizolfo, who actually built a physical model of it around the AMT bridge model.

 

[Phaser Two]

Yes, based on a concept by John Zizolfo, who actually built a physical model of it around the AMT bridge model.

Can you repost the image? I can't access it for some reason and I want to because I think it lines up with what I've always suspected.

 

[Albertese]

Can you repost the image? I can't access it for some reason and I want to because I think it lines up with what I've always suspected.

I, too, cannot see the image.

--Alex

 

[MAGolding]

I also can't see Forbin's image.

 

[publiusr]

I take a different view. I was a teenager when the Franz Joseph material was published, the perfect age to eat it up, and I love it.

But today I would scale up the size of the ship about 10 or 15 percent, so the bridge and its turbolift fit entirely inside the Deck 1 housing. And what seems to be the turbolift housing on the ship's exterior is not that. It's something else. Thus the captain's chair and helm console face forward.

The recent issue of Star Trek the magazine seems to agree with you.

I call that cylinder a big Kelvin pod.

I love Forbin’s fix—but would this scale out to the ship being longer than 947’?

In FJ’s side view, the bridge seems a bit larger in relation to the B/C deck beneath it. A bit less with the AMT?

Skewing the bridge looks to keep everything compact. But the bridge atop the 11 footer seems smaller in relation to B/C...a button bridge. Enlarge it as here, and Enterprise may need some scaling up. No problem with that...just say the 947 ft length doesn’t include the nacelles.

The space between decks then allows conduits and the decks seem less razor thin

 

[BK613]

Yes, based on a concept by John Zizolfo, who actually built a physical model of it around the AMT bridge model.

Do you have an image of that model? The only hits I could find is him trying to make an accurate version of the AMT bridge model (from 1998 reposted by cultTVman.net). Doesn't include the extra bit, just the single turbolift car

 

[Keith1701]

It works for me.

 

[Forbin]

Reposting, but if you couldn't access my site the first time (and I don't know why!) then it won't help. Here's the URL as well.
http://www.inpayne.com/temp/bridge.jpg

 

[Forbin]

And yes, there's a fudge factor - it requires the bridge outer dome to be bigger (to scale) then it really is, or for the bridge to be lower into the B/C deck.

 

[Phaser Two]

Ah, thanks. That I can see. Yup, it's what I must have read somewhere years ago and always assumed, about the multiple lifts. Makes sense for the ship's command center.

I like the idea of the bridge sinking down a bit into Deck Two. Deck Two was hardly ever (if even once) mentioned - I think it had science labs according to FJ. It seems as though it could accommodate the bridge coming down into its area.

 

[Shawnster]

As much as I love FJ and his plans, I never accepted the odd angle Bridge idea.

 

[MGagen]

Since the Enterprise doesn't really exist, you can imagine anything you want.

As soon as you decide to treat it as an actual, physical object, or make scale drawings of it, you'll find that the forward facing bridge doesn't work. In the case of the drawing above, it suffers from the same mistake Khan made: Two-dimensional thinking. Enlarging the ship so that the base of the turbo fits within the dome isn't near enough to keep it from erupting from the steeply curved wall of the dome.

If the Enterprise is 947' long; and the bridge is the same size as the actual set, the turbolift must be inside the exterior tube. Unless:

a. You drop the bridge entirely down to deck 2 within the teardrop.
b. You move the exterior tube around 35.5 degrees to port.
c. You scale the ship up substantially (far larger than you imagine).

Ziz's bridge model was a true thing of beauty. But the exterior hull was not accurate to the ship, either in scale or shape. It had a profile similar to the bridge on the original AMT model, but enlarged by quite a bit.

The plain answer to whether the tube on the outside was the turbolift housing, and whether the bridge faced to the side was answered by Matt Jefferies himself, when he designed the Phase II refit. He gave the bridge two turbolifts and provided two offset tubes on the outside of the bridge dome (like Mickey ears). Obviously, he fixed two things that had bugged him about the original: He turned it to face forward and gave it a second exit...

Long, long ago, on this very BBS, Captain April and I debated this issue in one of the truly epic, long-running threads of all time. I am not sure that it is still preserved on the system, but if it is, revisiting it is not for the faint of heart. Some legends are best left buried...

M.

 

[Tosk]

Deck Two was hardly ever (if even once) mentioned - I think it had science labs according to FJ.

Wasn't there an ep where Spock takes the turbolift to deck two from the bridge and it takes over a minute to get there?

 

[Albertese]

Wasn't there an ep where Spock takes the turbolift to deck two from the bridge and it takes over a minute to get there?

"The Enterprise Incident" I believe.

--Alex