Another fan attempt at TOS deck plans

[Shaw]

So no, I was not aware that the 11 foot model was built for "Where No Man Has Gone Before" and the two images I posted from the cage are of the unlit 3 foot model. But I'm always happy to learn something new everyday.

Ahhhh, trying sarcasm on the web again, are we? Because I've always found that that works REEEEEAL well. (<- that was sarcasm. Sarcasm on the web doesn't work at ALL. Seriously. I mean it.)

It can work... you just have to realize that not everyone is going to be in on it.

Now I'm going to have to go back and see which one I picked. That has a hauntingly familiar ring to it. I know I wound up just extruding that aft curve down to the bottom of the trench, and flattened it out as it tapered down to the bottom. So whatever shape that produced...

When I started this study model, I was under the impression that whatever had to be done would need to be drastic, so I wasn't worried about it not being absolutely perfect. I mean, after all, the curve you would expect is significantly off.

What I found is that very small fudging of the shapes can make a big difference in a physical model.

I plan on getting better photos later in the week, but here is what I have right now...

 

[Tallguy]

I plan on getting better photos later in the week, but here is what I have right now...

Yup! That's what I built! Great idea adding the grid. That's ridiculously helpful. Thanks so much for doing this.

 

[yotsuya]

You are aware that the 11 foot model was built for "Where No Man Has Gone Before" and the two images you posted from the cage are of the unlit 3 foot model, right?

Well, currently this thread is documenting my progress towards finishing up plans of the 11 foot model as it appeared for The Cage in December 1964. Those exterior plans of the model will then be altered to take the place of the plans of my original exterior study drawings which had been used in all my earlier sketches.

As a tangential project, I plan on a 10 sheet set of plans of the Enterprise of The Cage, which (along with the 11 foot plans I'm working on right now) will include an extended version of my studies of Jefferies plans (from November 7, 1964) and a modified version of my plans of the 33 inch model (as it appeared in December 1964). And there will be a write up of the history of the creation of these models that I am compiling... including this timeline I posted earlier in this thread.

....

So no, I was not aware that the 11 foot model was built for "Where No Man Has Gone Before" and the two images I posted from the cage are of the unlit 3 foot model. But I'm always happy to learn something new everyday.

Being stubborn, I am not going to admit learning anything new. My information has been based on several sources and the unlit state of the model in the images in question.

Taking the images as you say, it poses several questions. First, the report I read on the now defunct IDIC pages questioned the detailing on the surface of the model based on the statements of one of the builders that the model was clean and a single color. Those images show clear streaking and some radial lines on the upper surface of the saucer. Clearly this would cast doubt on the statements of the surface being a uniform color. Also, it means the model was not just slightly modified, as it was between WNMHGB and the series, but drastically modified and likely repainted. If the windows and other lighted features on the hull were not present yet (vs. just not illuminated yet) then all the windows would have had to be cut and lights mounted inside.

One of the IDIC images that I had saved is of the model as it was unpacked by the Smithsonian. It shows the same streaking it has in the most recent pictures. The difference in streaking is another way I was telling the two models apart. If that is not the case, then it might appear that only the 33 inch model was not detailed.

Also, I wish you would have used higher quality images. Several of those would reveal some interesting features of the 33 inch model if they were higher quality. I have the one in the lowest left corner of a decent size (on an old poster) that really shows a lot of detail including how the back of the dorsal was shaped. It is quite different from the 11 foot dorsal.

I also have one picture in a 40 year old book where I can clearly see the grid lines on the edge of the saucer. Not just one, but several.

While I think the grid lines as they appear now (other than the upper surface of the saucer) have been exaggerated a bit, the information I have seen from screen captures and some older photos makes me believe that the grid lines were added during or before the rework done for the main series run.

 

[BK613]

Not taking sides but this site had a couple of pix of a lighted WNMHGB version of the 1701. Where does that fall in the chronology of lit/unlit? Just how many mods did they make to her?

 

[Albertese]

...

Being stubborn, I am not going to admit learning anything new. My information has been based on several sources and the unlit state of the model in the images in question.

Taking the images as you say, it poses several questions. First, the report I read on the now defunct IDIC pages questioned the detailing on the surface of the model based on the statements of one of the builders that the model was clean and a single color. Those images show clear streaking and some radial lines on the upper surface of the saucer. Clearly this would cast doubt on the statements of the surface being a uniform color. Also, it means the model was not just slightly modified, as it was between WNMHGB and the series, but drastically modified and likely repainted. If the windows and other lighted features on the hull were not present yet (vs. just not illuminated yet) then all the windows would have had to be cut and lights mounted inside.

One of the IDIC images that I had saved is of the model as it was unpacked by the Smithsonian. It shows the same streaking it has in the most recent pictures. The difference in streaking is another way I was telling the two models apart. If that is not the case, then it might appear that only the 33 inch model was not detailed.

Also, I wish you would have used higher quality images. Several of those would reveal some interesting features of the 33 inch model if they were higher quality. I have the one in the lowest left corner of a decent size (on an old poster) that really shows a lot of detail including how the back of the dorsal was shaped. It is quite different from the 11 foot dorsal.

I also have one picture in a 40 year old book where I can clearly see the grid lines on the edge of the saucer. Not just one, but several.

While I think the grid lines as they appear now (other than the upper surface of the saucer) have been exaggerated a bit, the information I have seen from screen captures and some older photos makes me believe that the grid lines were added during or before the rework done for the main series run.

My understanding, which if in error will no doubt be corrected, is that most of the shots in "The Cage" were indeed the 33" study model. the reason being that the 11' model was as yet incomplete to do all the required shots. However, the 11' model was finished and photographed for the "push-in-to-bridge" shot, which GR really wanted to establish a sense of scale for the ship. This shot would have been next to impossible with the smaller model. In fact, I've read that the whole reason there was a grid on top of the model, was as a visual reference to make this particular effects shot line up. you can tell it's the 11' model from the lower half of the saucer, which is obviously different from the 33" model, which is much more "flattened".

As originally built, (IIRC) neither model was lighted. When being refurbished for the 2nd pilot, lighting was added to it, but in such a way as to make it un-filmable from the left side, as large holes had to be drilled into the hull and huge cables strung out to power it all, as the electrical pats were an afterthought. When it was time for the actual production shots, the model was refit again, with modifications to the nacelle ends and forward dish, as well as lowering the bridge dome and repainting a number of the details.

But the fact that it's unlighted in "The Cage" does nothing to demonstrate it's the smaller model.

--Alex

 

[Shaw]

Taking the images as you say, it poses several questions. First, the report I read on the now defunct IDIC pages questioned the detailing on the surface of the model based on the statements of one of the builders that the model was clean and a single color. Those images show clear streaking and some radial lines on the upper surface of the saucer. Clearly this would cast doubt on the statements of the surface being a uniform color.

What is seen on the model in that image was not intended by the builders... lighting can bring out aspects of a paint job that were unseen and unintended.

And the model was late... originally only the 11 foot model was to be used, the 33 inch model was just an approval article. They started running out of time and (as Albertese said) started filming the 33 inch model, but in the end, the big effects shot, the one to sell the size of the Enterprise to the viewers, had to be done with the 11 foot model.

Also, it means the model was not just slightly modified, as it was between WNMHGB and the series, but drastically modified and likely repainted. If the windows and other lighted features on the hull were not present yet (vs. just not illuminated yet) then all the windows would have had to be cut and lights mounted inside.

True.

As I recall, the original model cost about $3,000 to build in December of 1964, and an additional $3,000 was spend to add lighting and other details in August 1965. And she was modified yet again in April of 1966 for how she looked in the first season (with additional detailing added throughout the run of the show).

One of the IDIC images that I had saved is of the model as it was unpacked by the Smithsonian. It shows the same streaking it has in the most recent pictures. The difference in streaking is another way I was telling the two models apart. If that is not the case, then it might appear that only the 33 inch model was not detailed.

The two models are quite different, streaking of paint shouldn't be how one tells them apart.

Also, I wish you would have used higher quality images. Several of those would reveal some interesting features of the 33 inch model if they were higher quality. I have the one in the lowest left corner of a decent size (on an old poster) that really shows a lot of detail including how the back of the dorsal was shaped. It is quite different from the 11 foot dorsal.

I'm guessing that you didn't follow my studies of the 33 inch model a few years ago... I spent quite a bit of time picking apart the geometry of that model which included spending time on the dorsal (which I took quite a bit of care on within my plans of the 33 inch model). I am taking the same level of care in my studies of the 11 foot model in this project (in which I've found many details that are quite different from other people's plans).

For those missing these pages as a reference, here are archived versions while we wait for the originals to return...

Star Trek History: The Cage

Star Trek History: Models & Bluescreen​

Not taking sides but this site had a couple of pix of a lighted WNMHGB version of the 1701. Where does that fall in the chronology of lit/unlit? Just how many mods did they make to her?

The first 11 images are from WNMHGB (after the first modification). The rest are series images. There were two major modifications while she was a working girl (Aug 1965, April 1966) and three more after her retirement (1974, 1984, 1992).

 

[yotsuya]

Not taking sides but this site had a couple of pix of a lighted WNMHGB version of the 1701. Where does that fall in the chronology of lit/unlit? Just how many mods did they make to her?

That site has a couple of b&w images where you can see the grid lines on the edge and bottom of the saucer. (that is, after the ship was modified for the series)

 

[Maurice]

Are those actually grid lines, or are those deformations caused by the radial cross section structures inside the saucer?

 

[Albertese]

Are those actually grid lines, or are those deformations caused by the radial cross section structures inside the saucer?

Do you mean on the "real" ship or the model? If we're talking about the model, then, no, they are grid lines. Grudgingly drawn with a pencil and a trammel by Matt "the Man" Jefferies in concession to somebody's (Roddenberry's?) desire to have some more surface detail. Also, they were required to line up the effects shot of the push in to the bridge dome from "The Cage." But he drew them as light as he could in hopes of the not being legible on the final processed footage. Or so I've read.

If you mean "the ship itself" then I suppose it would really be the butt joints between the panels that comprise the outer hull.

--Alex

 

[BK613]

Are those actually grid lines, or are those deformations caused by the radial cross section structures inside the saucer?

Do you mean on the "real" ship or the model? If we're talking about the model, then, no, they are grid lines. Grudgingly drawn with a pencil and a trammel by Matt "the Man" Jefferies in concession to somebody's (Roddenberry's?) desire to have some more surface detail. Also, they were required to line up the effects shot of the push in to the bridge dome from "The Cage." But he drew them as light as he could in hopes of the not being legible on the final processed footage. Or so I've read.

If you mean "the ship itself" then I suppose it would really be the butt joints between the panels that comprise the outer hull.

--Alex

May be the faint lines visible in this shot?

 

[yotsuya]

May be the faint lines visible in this shot?

That is one of the images. I've captured frames of several of the early episodes and they are visible in any of the closeup shots. The grid lines are on the top, bottom, and edge of the saucer. The grid lines would have been very obvious in the pre composite shots (the raw effects photage) but because of the grain in the final film, most of the details are obscured. The grid lines would have been obvious to anyone watching the dailies of the effects shots.

They are the same grid lines found on Jeffries top plan except the plan shows 6 divisions per 90 degrees and the model has 7 divisions per 90 degrees.

 

[Captain Robert April]

It's been pretty well established for decades that the push-in shot was done with the 11-foot model. All you have to do is look at the underside of the primary hull to tell it's the eleven footer, so these sources that say otherwise are quite simply full of it.

 

[CuttingEdge100]

Shaw,

Considering the Enterprise would be designed out of materials (and construction techniques) far more advanced than what would be available today, I'm wondering how this would affect mass estimates.


CuttingEdge100

 

[CuttingEdge100]

When the saucer seperates from the main hull, granted in emergencies, I'm wondering wouldn't it need a nav-deflector of it's own? The nav-deflectors seem to be used even at impulse speeds and the TOS D-7 had a sensor and deflector in the dent (that later became a torpedo tube)


CuttingEdge100

 

[yotsuya]

When the saucer seperates from the main hull, granted in emergencies, I'm wondering wouldn't it need a nav-deflector of it's own? The nav-deflectors seem to be used even at impulse speeds and the TOS D-7 had a sensor and deflector in the dent (that later became a torpedo tube)


CuttingEdge100

The old FJ plans had an answer for you. The three circular lights/ports on the bow of the saucer are sensor/deflectors. This would be sufficient for the separated saucer as it is limited to impulse speeds. You can find that on deck 7 in his plans. That also nicely ties with the location of the deflector on NX-01.

 

[CuttingEdge100]

Yotsuya,

Sounds good to me

 

[USS Mariner]

Quick question Shaw. I've started to work on my old model again, and just had a few questions about your layouts.

What are the radial figures of the "compartments" you came up with for the primary hull, based on the pressure hull diagram? I'm trying to extrapolate them in CAD, but I just wanted to know, if you're working in scale, what those are.

Here's a shot of what I gathered.

 

[CuttingEdge100]

I was thinking about something looking at this drawing: http://www.shawcomputing.net/racerx/trek_stuff/jefferies/preshull-diagram.jpg

Could the Enterprise have been built in a modular fashion in this regard? With the various rings and segments, built as individual modules (or at least those modules made out of a few pieces each, then joined to make the big segments) then joined together to produce the final saucer design?

I've seen this kind of construction on even some large ships (i.e. military and civilian ships) to an extent and it would reflect the modularity in Star Trek ship designs.


BTW: Not to sound stupid but why do you have one extra ring (Ring 2) on the front of the saucer and not the back of the saucer. I don't quite understand that...

 

[USS Mariner]

^That's exactly what he and many others have though regard starship construction. The reason for the larger section on the back of the saucer is unknown, but a lot of think it may have to do with power generating or the impulse engines on the saucer, located near the aft of the saucer.

 

[Captain Robert April]

Auxiliary deuterium slush tanks for the impulse engines, perhaps?