Forget all that has been established about starship bridges. It's 2008, and you've been tasked with designing a control facility for a sci-fi spaceship having Star Trek-level technology. Based on current and speculative technologies, what would the bridge look like? What would its capabilities be?
Think outside the box. Would it be circular? Would people sit in front of physical push-button controls, flat-panel screens, or something else? Would people use TV set-style visual displays? Would there be an enormous TV set at the front of the room? What would the stations be? Would there even need to be a single control room? What about something virtual and/or holodeck-based?
Okay, instead of starting with shapes and colors and so forth, I think you really need to think about FUNCTIONS and PURPOSES. Don't you agree?
So let's see. What primary functions need to be handled from the bridge?
1) Steering (aka "helm")
2) Course planning... "cartography and maps" if you like... aka "navigation." Which really does need to be a separate function, as far as I'm concerned (contrary to TNG).
3) Weapons and defense command and control.
4) External communications.
5) Ship's status monitoring.
6) "Mission status" monitoring (configurable depending on what's going on... ie, a station to track landing party operations, or starmapping operations, or whatever else).
7) Intelligence (already-processed data from external sensors and so forth).
8) Commanding officer's station.
Each of these stations would be manned 24 hours a day, seven days a week, with the possible exception of the "mission status" one which would only be manned (and operational) when required for a particular purpose.
The status displays would include a "main viewer" as well as a separate "navigational display" and a separate "ship's status board." These would all be big, and would be visible by the commanding officer and helmsman at all times, and would be visible by anyone else on the bridge with minimal effort.
Each and every workstation should be visible to the commanding officer, with minimal effort (ie, he shouldn't have to go walking around to see what's going on at any workstation).
Most workstations, however, would face away from the main screen, because the people working at those stations shouldn't be watching the "big screen" but rather should be focusing on their own jobs without distraction. They shouldn't be watching the commanding officer, either.
SO... I really, REALLY like the circular arrangement with the captain in the middle, and with the helmsman in the middle and in front of the captain. It really does make just a ton of practical sense.
The orientation of the bridge (ie, facing forward or at some odd angle or even facing directly rearwards) makes absolutely no difference. It's the INTERNAL arrangement that matters, and the "bridge front faces ship front" argument is nonsensical.
Practically, the bridge would be near the core of the ship, rather than on-top. The only real advantage of having the bridge on top would be if you planned to use it as a lifeboat, so the captain could evacuate his crew and still have a chance of surviving at the last moment. However, I see this as being a very "slim" argument for having it on top.
There are a few other things I'd do as well.
1) Every single crewman would have a seat... a SECURED, SEAT-BELT-EQUIPPED SEAT.
2) Every single workstation would have a locker for emergency gear (breathing apparatus, emergency pressure suit, etc).
3) There would be a security station near the entranceway, which would always be manned. This security station would block direct access to the bridge and would have, among other things, a small-arms locker.
4) There would be a secondary accessway, lockable from inside and in plain sight (say, near the main viewer... maybe in the decking just in front of it) to preclude anyone ever "sneaking in."
5) There would be an attached "wardroom" including a bathroom, a small "dining area" and casual duty stations for a few "replacement" crewmen who would be able to cover for anyone who had to briefly leave their station for a meal or a bathroom break. This would be on the inside of the security barrier, of course, not outside.
6) There wouldn't be a "captain's ready room" or whatever. That's just silly, AFAIK. No ship is so big that the captain can't do that stuff in his cabin. Especially not a starship with super-duper-turbo-lifts.
7) It would only be as large as necessary for clear viewing and for all the folks to actually do their jobs... no larger.
Form follows function, in other words.
Now... more details on individual workstations?
1) The captain's station. This would be a seated station, with a programmable console with a display. Something along the lines of a small laptop computer, though probably configured a bit differently. I'd set it up as a comfortable chair with a fold-over-in-front console.
2) The helm station. This would have a console with two major sections... one for "manual flying" and one for "programmed flying." The manual one might well include a joystick/throttle/rudder ("HOTAS") arrangement. I'd have these on a console that rotates in front of the fixed helm chair, which would always be facing "front."
3) The navigation display would be to one side of the main viewer and would, normally, be watched just as much (probably moreso, in fact) than the viewer itself. It would be a spherical holographic "tank" which would project a volume of space, with iconic rpresentations. It might also include a regular 2D rectangular screen as a secondary supplement (ie, to give information about particular items). The navigator's station would be adjacent to that, facing the "tank," but the entire thing would be visible to the helmsman and captain at all times as well.
4) You notice I left out "engineering" at all. Well, not really... the "ship's status" station would serve this role. There's absolutely no point to controlling the engines or life support or whatever from the bridge, but you do want to MONITOR those things. So this station, with it's big displays, would be to the opposite side of the main display. It would provide information feedback, and a junior engineer would man it at all times, primarily to give information to the captain but not to actually DO anything.
5) Next would be the two entryways. They would be symmetrical. One would lead to the rest of the ship. This one would have a "security lobby" and would have the bridge security station as a part of it. On the other side would be the exit to the "wardroom" I mentioned before. The idea here is that no one would be able to enter or exit the bridge without the captain, the helmsman, and the security officer from being able to see who they were and what they were doing.
6) Next, you'd have the mission station. The "mission" station might well be broken up two or more workstations... probably near the midline of the bridge... just aft of the two "entryways." This would make it relatively easy for the captain to watch the main indicators of the ship's status while keeping the "mission" stuff in his peripheral vision... no need to turn around.
Finally, just aft of there, and adjacent, would be the intelligence station and communication station. Intelligence is the equivalent of Spock's station, which I always thought was misnamed when it was called the "science station." You might call it "sensors control and monitoring" or you might call it "intelligence" but it's not a laboratory, so "science" is really incorrect. The captain would not normally need to be aware of what was happening at these stations, so they'd be behind him. If anything came up that was particularly important, he could turn around, of course, but normally, they'd be giving him verbal feedback and that would be enough. They, also, have no need to be watching the main displays at the front under most circumstances.
The bridge should be secure... should be potentially self-sufficient (see my prior comment re: breathers and vac-suits, and the weapons locker), and should cover only the "higher functions" of the ship. Science labs, conference rooms, personal office space, engineering controls, etc... or non-critical mission-associated operations... should occur elsewhere in the ship.
That's how I'd design a bridge.
Honestly, I think that the TOS bridge is pretty damned close to this, and later bridges generally deviated from it... being better-suited for storytelling, perhaps (one set covers many purposes) while making a lot less practical sense.
Anyway... dig in and pick my commentary apart if you guys like.
