Unseen TOS....

[Warped9]

Except it’s the same small set we saw them use in previous second season episodes.

People’s mileage will vary in how they envision the ship’s interior is laid out. We know little to nothing about what lies under the flight deck, what the forward bulkhead of the flight deck looks like and what lies on the other side of that bulkhead.

 

[blssdwlf]

If it is the same small set from season 2 then all the corridors in front of the center door were replaced resulting in the angled approach to the center door in season 3. If you refer back to the Season 2 screencaps the corridor approach is straight on to the center blue door.

Or a simpler explanation is that there is another door on a corner that has an angled entry to the flight/hangar deck.

EDIT: Either way is possible since the Engine Rooms kept getting updated between episodes. Maybe an update necessitated routing the corridors to the hangar deck around.

 

[Warped9]

The problem with rationalizing some of the interior sets is that you run into inevitable production compromises. They had a limited number of sets and corridors, and while they could be updated and/or redressed it didn’t always make sense when you endeavour to actually lay out the ship with where everything seen onscreen is supposedly located.

On my flight deck model there are three access points at the forward bulkhead: one centre and one on each side port and starboard. The alcoves on either side of the flight deck, behind hatchways, lead to ladders that go down to the service deck.

 

[aridas sofia]

^I have said this over and over. If we built a cgi interior based on some approximation of Matt Jefferies’ cross section, there would be inevitable differences relative to the sets needed just to get the spaces to fit in the shape of the outer hull.

 

[Warped9]

The bridge is the ultimate production compromise. The turbolift was initially meant to be directly aft of the con, but they offset the bridge turbolift simply because it was more visually dramatic. And for decades we’ve been arguing whether the bridge faces directly forward or not.

We saw two Engineering sets—same set, but updated. We can rationalize there must be two Engineering areas: one for the saucer and Main Engineering down in the secondary hull. But in “Day Of The Dove” we were to understand most of the crew had somehow been stranded down in the support hull and yet we see Kang and his crew occupy what we’re to understand as main Engineering. WTF?

And, of course, the depiction of the hangar deck and shuttlecraft were massive production compromises.

 

[blssdwlf]

This has nothing to do with recreating anything in CGI or "production compromises."

My comment is specific to Warped9's statement that LTBYLB is the same set used in previous second season episodes which it is not since the set's corridors are different in season three. I did offer some in-universe rationalizations of why it might be different and one of them was a side entrance which Warped9 offers up in a followup post:

"On my flight deck model there are three access points at the forward bulkhead: one centre and one on each side port and starboard. The alcoves on either side of the flight deck, behind hatchways, lead to ladders that go down to the service deck"​

In LTBYLB, I imagine the shuttlecraft parked head in. Lokai exits the shuttlecraft and sees the sign "elevator" on the port bulkhead and staggers that way toward the port side door and not the center door.

Except it’s the same small set we saw them use in previous second season episodes.

People’s mileage will vary in how they envision the ship’s interior is laid out. We know little to nothing about what lies under the flight deck, what the forward bulkhead of the flight deck looks like and what lies on the other side of that bulkhead.

 

[aridas sofia]

“This has nothing to do with recreating anything in CGI or "production compromises."

Of course it does. There is a sound stage in which standing sets are built. Other sets are needed for a particular episode. They have to fit them in, where they can, based on what is there. What is there changes from season to season, and even from week to week. What was built to begin with was an approximation of what would fit in the hull, with adaptations made for the dramatic purposes for which it was to be employed. It was a compromise from the start, before anybody even needed to fit something else in.

It was all a compromise and adaptation, and saying it should be taken as holy writ because it was what ended up onscreen - when even THAT got filtered through distorting lenses and lighting - is what is, on its face, absurd, and fails to take into account everything about the very things that were seen onscreen.

The point of even raising cgi was to provide an example of what would get around production compromises such as those listed above. And such as the example you mention, where the configuration of that hangar entry shown in one season changes completely the next. Sure, you can rationalize it. Or you can try to get at what was intended. OR, you can use modern technology to build your own sets cgi. They are all legitimate approaches, but they are also all addressing production compromises.

 

[blssdwlf]

So based on your response, you agree that the set seen in LTBYLB looks different and is not the same set seen used in Season 2 as per Warped9 because "production compromises" prevented it the same one from being used?

If that's what the "production compromise" excuse is for then, okay, that's another reason that they are not the same in Season 3 compared to Season 2. I was just offering an in-universe reason but since you prefer the bts reason...

“This has nothing to do with recreating anything in CGI or "production compromises."

Of course it does. There is a sound stage in which standing sets are built. Other sets are needed for a particular episode. They have to fit them in, where they can, based on what is there. What is there changes from season to season, and even from week to week. What was built to begin with was an approximation of what would fit in the hull, with adaptations made for the dramatic purposes for which it was to be employed. It was a compromise from the start, before anybody even needed to fit something else in.

It was all a compromise and adaptation, and saying it should be taken as holy writ because it was what ended up onscreen - when even THAT got filtered through distorting lenses and lighting - is what is, on its face, absurd, and fails to take into account everything about the very things that were seen onscreen.

The point of even raising cgi was to provide an example of what would get around production compromises such as those listed above. And such as the example you mention, where the configuration of that hangar entry shown in one season changes completely the next. Sure, you can rationalize it. Or you can try to get at what was intended. OR, you can use modern technology to build your own sets cgi. They are all legitimate approaches, but they are also all addressing production compromises.

 

[Warped9]

What we saw in LTBYLB is most likely the same set (or end of corridor) used in the previous season. It’s not impossible it was another set, but I find it unlikely given they already had a set. If a respectable source can be cited to prove otherwise I welcome it to be shared here.

I will try my damndest to recreate what we see onscreen, but often enough something has to give. You have to decide whether you want to straight up replicate a filming set or prop or if you’re endeavouring to create the “real” locale or object what is seen onscreen is trying to depict.

I have changed my mind based on something someone offers up that works better than my solution. But if I don’t change my mind then I don’t see the point in arguing over it. Hell, we’re grown men obsessing over a fifty year old television show. In some circles that would be seen as truly sad and lame (yeah, but what-the-fuck do they know? )

 

[blssdwlf]

What we saw in LTBYLB is most likely the same set (or end of corridor) used in the previous season. It’s not impossible it was another set, but I find it unlikely given they already had a set. If ia respectable source can be cited to prove otherwise I welcome it to be shared here.

Perhaps we are describing two different things. It sounds like you're describing the LTBYLB as using the same pieces from Season 2 for the set while I'm describing that the LTBYLB set is not identical in layout to the Season 2 versions. For example, all the screens below are of that same section of the corridor but arranged differently. That difference in layout and lighting and the people for context is how we can easily tell what episode and season it's from. It's like me building a car and you build a plane out of the same pieces in a lego set.

I will try my damndest to recreate what we see onscreen, but often enough something has to give. You have to decide whether you want to straight up replicate a filming set or prop or if you’re endeavouring to create the “real” locale or object what is seen onscreen is trying to depict.

I have changed my mind based on something someone offers up that works better than my solution. But if I don’t change my mind then I don’t see the point in arguing over it. Hell, we’re grown men obsessing over a fifty year old television show. In some circles that would be seen as truly sad and lame (yeah, but what-the-fuck do they know? )

And again, I'm just responding to your reply that I read as the sets are the same (as in identical) while you're likely referring to them as the same sets because they used the same pieces. It was not to tell you to make it more accurate to something or anything. Make it your own way.

 

[aridas sofia]

I don’t think it is one thing or the other, but both - the old hangar entrance put into a different - or differently situated - corridor. It could be it had to be bent to make it fit on the stage at the time it was needed. That’s what I was referring to by the stage itself being restrictive and its arrangement changing over time.

 

[publiusr]

And those “A” frames might be in areas of the ship that need extra strength.

Now, in action-adventure fare, it might be good to do what-if’s.

Now, suppose I am a hostile in a small craft and I open fire in the shuttlebay.

What’s on the other side that I hit?

How can you protect against it?

 

[Warped9]

Without getting too far astray.

Where in the secondary hull is Main Engineering? Is it in the heart of the secondary hull somewhere forward of the flight deck? Or, as the ceiling in Main Engineering might suggest, is it at the top of the secondary hull forward of the support pylons somewhat like what is suggested in TMP?

And the funny thing about that ceiling seems to suggest we are really seeing half of Main Engineering while the other half is unseen behind the frame of the camera.

 

[aridas sofia]

“And the funny thing about that ceiling seems to suggest we are really seeing half of Main Engineering while the other half is unseen behind the frame of the camera.”

Absolutely. If one takes that ceiling seriously, we are left with the possibility that the glowing trapezoid behind the mesh is one of two, with another one to the far right out of view, and that each one is dedicated to a nacelle.

 

[Warped9]

I’m currently working out the access hatch in open mode. It’s more complicated than it looks. Suffice to say it doesn’t work exactly like it does onscreen.

In TOS the access hatch was a relatively simple affair wherein the inner and outer hatch were essentially one and the same. But in reality it can’t be, not with a double hull structure, particularly as the sides of the exterior taper toward the bow and the sides of the interior run straight and parallel with each other. This is where we hit yet another production compromise in that the exterior and interior mockups were built with simplicity in mind rather than reality.

My solution resulted in two hatches: one inner and one outer. The outer hatch is the familiar three-piece with lowering gangway. The inner hatch is simply two floor-to-ceiling sliding panels. The two hatches can work in unison or separately. This means the outer hatch could be breached or damaged yet the inner hull could still remain airtight. Strictly speaking, for a spacecraft, this is a more realistic setup than one singular hatch like on an aircraft.

When both hatches are open the most obvious difference between this and the onscreen version will be in the thickness of the between-hulls section. That thickness was minimal on the filming mockups while my version will be noticeably thicker. The result will look something like a very short tunnel between the exterior and interior hulls. This won’t be so apparent when viewed at right angles to the port side, but it will become distinctly noticeably when viewed from greater angles.

Not to bash TOS, but the approach of designing the exterior and interior separately and each being a production compromise at cross purposes—an exterior built smaller than actual size and an interior built larger than actual size—would result in inevitable contradictions. The only way to avoid that would have been to know exactly what was needed from the get-go and let one guy work out the whole thing to keep it consistent. But thats asking a lot for a television production. And if you think TOS was bad take a good look at the Jupiter 2 of Lost In Space and the Seaview from Voyage To The Bottom Of The Sea—both Irwin Allen vehicles needed to be distinctly bigger than their exteriors were portrayed.

 

[Warped9]

Not strictly part of this project, but this is something you would have never seen on TOS: the shuttlecraft's inner hull.




Note: I just figured out my exterior access hatch gangway has to rotate down about 78 degrees before resting on the port nacelle.

 

[MGagen]

Warped9: Sorry I've been absent so long and didn't answer you question about focal length. I do not recall; but judging from the excellent renders you've posted since then, you've figured it out. You have given us a wonderful "real" flight deck!

We are definitely on the same page about how well MJ's intended designs fit inside the ship exterior. It's mainly those pesky production compromises that give us extra work in harmonizing...

I particularly like the way you've suggested the pylon structure in the forward hangar bulkhead; and the nice door alcoves that echo the trapezoidal openings on the side walls. Nice touches.

The only nit I would pick is that the exterior viewports visible through the gallery widows on the starboard side should be round portholes. The ones on the port side, which we saw from the inside in COTK, are properly rectangular.

My own version of the hangar omits the central door in the forward bulkhead. I figured that would impinge on the location MJ gives us for Engineering. I put myself in the camp that imagines the embarkation scenes taking place after the shuttle is lowered down into the smaller, more easily pressurized, lower hangar level.

Looking forward with great eagerness to what you show us next...

M.

 

[Warped9]

In “The Conscience Of The King” we see a porthole on the gallery and it’s rectangular. There are two of them I think…maybe.

Re: Main Engineering. More and more I’m convinced Main Engineering is at the top surface of the secondary hull and just forward of the support pylons, somewhat similar to what we see in TMP. For me the clue is the visible ceiling seen in Main Engineering: it’s curved. And given what we see I suspect we see only half of Main Engineering with the other half off screen behind the camera’s point-of-view.

As such Main Engineering would not be impinging on the central doorway at the forward bulkhead of the flight deck.

 

[MGagen]

We've only ever seen the starboard side of the ship from the exterior and there are two round portholes in the right place for the starboard gallery. We saw a port side gallery window from the inside and it was indeed rectangular. Just another clue that the window patterns aren't bilaterally symmetrical.

Regarding Engineering, I figured that the arched ceiling might be part of the support structure for the nacelle pylons. It may be concentric with the curve of the hull, but deeper inside, away from the surface. Of course the actual set piece is curved, then goes flat. That might support the supposition up thread that there are two big glowing chambers with "Scotty Retaining Mesh" and we are only seeing the starboard one...

It is interesting that the Phase II cross section is very clear about engineering being at the deck level of the center of the secondary hull; or actually 2 feet above it:

Since the pylons on the PII E slant in, it actually has a bit of space between the hangar and Engineering. I visualize this area being where the old "glowing conduit chamber" was in the TOS design:

Another thought: If Engineering is split into two halves, maybe there is a corridor that divides them and leads to the center entrance of the hangar, with Emergency Manual Monitor situated on top of it. The two rooms might be separate at "ground level" but joined at the top by the EMM where both rooms are visible through a mesh screen on either side.

These are just idle ramblings. I'm sure where ever you put your version of Main Engineering, you will make it work handsomely.

M.

 

[Warped9]

I hadn’t really decided where to put Main Engineering as it wasn’t really part of my working out the hangar deck. Maybe it’s something I should tackle. Hmm…