Designing the Enterprise....

[Warped9]

I will always recall how amazed I was when I first glimpsed the Enterprise. It was so far outside what usually passed for SF hardware. Yes, it had a saucer, but it didn't look anything like a "flying saucer" type ship and it certainly didn't look remotely rocketship like. It was very exotic looking and even a little alien like that really communicated the idea of highly advanced science and technology.

And the scale of it. Until Star Trek my impression of large sci-fi ships tended to be no larger than perhaps a jetliner or very large aircraft. Yet here was something the size of an aircraft carrier. And it was powered and propelled by exotic and barely understood means.

I was also impressed by its streamlining for something that didn't need to be. It was if the shape were meant to convey the ideals and aspirations of a civilization that had so mastered certain advanced technologies that aesthetic considerations were easily accomodated for what could have been a purely functional construct.

Since TOS I've seen some pretty cool looking SF hardware on film and TV yet nothing has made the same impression as Matt Jefferies' Enterprise design. The TMP refit gave the design a little more specific sense of scale and detail and portrayed it on a larger canvas. But overall I still find the TOS and TMP depiction of the Enterprise to be the best depictions of far future science and technology than I've ever seen elsewhere in sci-fi.

This was truly inspired work on Matt Jefferies part.

While watching the TOS-R marathon on Sept. 7th I was struck by two things. First, although I have a nice 32" Samsung LCD I wasn't seeing the episodes in actual HD because I'm on regular cable I thought a lot of the new shots looked pretty good. Indeed I thought they looked better overall than HD screenshots I've seen online. The cgi somehow looked a little less flat and less cartoony.

But I was also struck by how much I still like this design. I was particularly taken by new views of the Pike era Enterprise although I think they got one or two small details wrong (such as the lower sensor dome was more shallow on the original version of the 11ft filming model and the nav deflector should have been more red I think).

Still I really appreciate MJ's apparent sense of contextual logic in his design. He reasoned out how things were supposed to work as he proceeded and it really leant his design a strong sense of credibility as a far future space vehicle.

 

[Brutal Strudel]

Slate recently ran an article about what constitutes "genius," either as a work or as an individual. The consensus--both among the people consulted in the article and those who responded in the comments section--seemed to be that genius changes the game. The TOS ship--arrived at after laborious draft after draft--was a definitive game changer, a work of genius. Every Star Fleet ship since her (with the possible exception of DS9's Defiant*) is simply a variation on the theme she established.

Thing is, though--to me at least--she does evoke her pulp SF antecedents. The primary hull is essentially a flying saucer, the nacelles are essentially rockets (even if we know they don't provide classic Newtonian thrust, the vast majority of viewers almost certainly don't) and the secondary hull is a variation on the "cigar shape" often used to describe spacecraft--evocative as much of a blimp as a rocket. The design refines all of these elements and unites them (but does not overly unite them--one of the things I like about the TOS design is that she carries an illusion of functionality her successors lack; she's the only one that looks as if her designers valued function over form) in a way that makes the whole infinitely greater than the sum of its parts.

*The Defiant suggests Star Fleet's answer to the Millennium Falcon.

 

[Albertese]

I

...


But I was also struck by how much I still like this design. I was particularly taken by new views of the Pike era Enterprise although I think they got one or two small details wrong (such as the lower sensor dome was more shallow on the original version of the 11ft filming model and the nav deflector should have been more red I think).

...

I agree completely. I wonder what you mean about the lower sensor dome being more shallow. If you mean the lit up dome itself, I never noticed that. If you mean the surrounding structure of the hull being more shallow, then I must offer a modest correction. The shallower lower saucer was the 33" model that was shot for all "The Cage" effects shots (with the exception of the push in to the bridge dome, that was the 11' model). The 11' model's lower dome never changed as far as I know. I'd be interested to know if I am wrong about that.

The 11' model was built to be shot for footage in "The Cage" but wasn't finished in time. They used the 33" proof of concept model for the effects shots as it was available. But the big was used for the bridge push-in as that would not have been possible with the smaller one.

Hopefully I'm not ranting for no good reason. Shaw has studied these models exhaustively and his threads on the subject are fascinating reading.

--Alex

 

[Christopher]

...one of the things I like about the TOS design is that she carries an illusion of functionality her successors lack; she's the only one that looks as if her designers valued function over form...

I think one could make a case that NX-01 fits that description. Once you get past the producer-mandated resemblance to the Akira, Doug Drexler and the other designers really put a lot of thought into making it a functional vehicle inside and out. I didn't really appreciate that while the show was on, but the articles about it on Drexler's blog have really brought out its functional attributes.

Still, you're right -- what's cool about the TOS Enterprise is that it does look functional rather than "streamlined" like its successors. It's a disk and three cylinders attached by rods -- a set of very elementary shapes. The "streamlining" elements are subtle -- the rear fantail, the neck, the backs of the nacelles, the Art Deco elements here and there.

What was really innovative about the design -- and this has been too rarely followed up on in later ST ship designs -- is that it's clearly designed for weightless space. It's top-heavy, flimsy, not a design that could work in atmosphere or under gravity. And putting the engines far out on struts, removed from the body of the ship, was good design, suggesting powerful energies that the crew needed to be isolated from -- another aspect that's been lost in subsequent Trek (starting with TMP where they stuck the warp core right in the middle of the ship).

 

[Hambone]

The thing that always impressed me about the TOS Enterprise was this: Matt Jeffries designed the thing so well that any grade-school student could easily draw a picture of it using only a few simple lines, yet it invokes a real feeling of sophistication and power.

 

[JarodRussell]

And putting the engines far out on struts, removed from the body of the ship, was good design, suggesting powerful energies that the crew needed to be isolated from -- another aspect that's been lost in subsequent Trek (starting with TMP where they stuck the warp core right in the middle of the ship).

Where else would it be? The nuclear reactor of a submarine is also in the middle of the sub.

And they had the idea of saucer seperation for the TMP design, to save the crew when something goes wrong in the engineering section.

Matt Jeffries designed the thing so well that any grade-school student could easily draw a picture of it using only a few simple lines

The fun and sad thing is that the designer of this movie's ship failed to recreate those few simple lines.

 

[Christopher]

And putting the engines far out on struts, removed from the body of the ship, was good design, suggesting powerful energies that the crew needed to be isolated from -- another aspect that's been lost in subsequent Trek (starting with TMP where they stuck the warp core right in the middle of the ship).

Where else would it be? The nuclear reactor of a submarine is also in the middle of the sub.

My point is, the original design suggests that the engines proper were in the nacelles. Like the Discovery in 2001 -- the reason it has that long, long spine between the inhabited section and the engines is because of the radiation and heat given off by the engines. Vacuum is an insulator; a spaceship's reactor can't bleed off its heat as efficiently as that of a submarine surrounded by something as conductive as water, so having the reactor right inside the inhabited portion of the ship would cook the crew. If anything, a submarine crew probably needs that reactor heat to keep warm, since water is so good at removing heat. A spaceship has the opposite problem. Contrary to myth, it's hard to cool off in space, because vacuum insulates.

Also, the kind of energies you'd need to power a practical interplanetary or interstellar vessel would make the nuclear reactor of a submarine seem like a toaster oven; the radiation levels as well as the heat would be far more intense.

So the idea of separating the engine from the crew compartment has been part of many real-life design proposals for spacecraft as well as informed fictional designs such as the Discovery. My point is that I think Jefferies was thinking along the same well-informed lines.

And they had the idea of saucer seperation for the TMP design, to save the crew when something goes wrong in the engineering section.

First off, the idea of saucer separation was part of the original TOS design, and was even alluded to in dialogue in "The Apple." Second, it's not the point. See what I said above about heat and radiation. Realistically, if you had an intense matter-antimatter reaction going on in a part of your ship that had air, it would roast anyone in that compartment in an instant. Sure, I've heard people make rationalizations about magically advanced insulation technology and forcefields, but the first law of good engineering is "Keep it simple, stupid," and a few dozen meters of vacuum makes for a really good, simple, foolproof insulator.

 

[JarodRussell]

Since they use the magical component dilithium for the reaction, they can also use the magical forcefields to keep off the radiation and other magic to get rid off the heat, I have no problems with that.

When they were in engineering in TOS, were they in the main hull or in one of the nacelles?

 

[Christopher]

Since they use the magical component dilithium for the reaction, they can also use the magical forcefields to keep off the radiation and other magic to get rid off the heat, I have no problems with that.

The problem with a safety system based on forcefields is that if the power fails, you're dead. That's bad design. Safety systems should be designed to keep you safe even when there's a failure. A passive form of insulation like vacuum and distance is more reliable and failure-proof than an active form like magic forcefields. Good engineering doesn't assume that the technology will always work. It takes the possibility of failure into account and prepares for it.

When they were in engineering in TOS, were they in the main hull or in one of the nacelles?

The main engine room was clearly in the ship, since there were corridors leading right up to it, but there's no reason for the engine controls to be physically contiguous with the engines themselves. And the animated episode "One of Our Planets is Missing" portrayed the matter-antimatter reaction as something that occurred in the nacelles.

 

[JarodRussell]

I do see your point about the design issues, but if in the worst case the power totally fails, they are all dead anyway, because the containment for the antimatter storage will fail, and the ship will be blown to bits, doesn't really matter then if it happens in the nacelles or the main hull, as those have roughly the same distance to the saucer.

The fusion reactors for the impulse engines are also inside the saucer section, I believe.

 

[Chrisisall]

Slate recently ran an article about what constitutes "genius," either as a work or as an individual. The consensus--both among the people consulted in the article and those who responded in the comments section--seemed to be that genius changes the game. The TOS ship--arrived at after laborious draft after draft--was a definitive game changer, a work of genius.

Well said.

 

[ThereR4Lites]

The thing that always impressed me about the TOS Enterprise was this: Matt Jeffries designed the thing so well that any grade-school student could easily draw a picture of it using only a few simple lines, yet it invokes a real feeling of sophistication and power.

Agreed. The shape of the Enterprise has become one of those things people can recognize, no matter where they are from. You can say, "Star Trek" and people will know what you're talking about.

One thing about the Enterprise, they stayed true to the general, and I mean very general, form of the ship all the way up until E. Stupid E! Yeah it looks all aerodynamic and cool and junk, but the saucer just blends in to the engineering section way too much. I miss the D and TMP versions...

 

[Doomsday]

I have always thought the idea of the warp core being internal was insane. How many TNG episodes was the Ent. in danger because of an imminent warp core breach? And how many of those times was the warp core ejection system offline? That always drove me crazy, because:

1. A warp core ejection system should never be dependent upon any system being "on line", it should be some sort of manual/mechanical device(perhaps with explosive bolts or some kind of pressure cylinder to launch it) so that even if all the ship's powered systems were down, it could still be jettisioned.

2. To your point about physical proximity, if the warp core is in one or both nacelles, if worse came to worse, someone could go out in a shuttle and phaser it off the ship, or have some kind of manual disengagement possible so nothing could be offline in that type of emergency.

 

[Christopher]

^In reality, the goal of engineering design is to make catastrophic failures impossible. In action-adventure storytelling, the goal of engineering design is to make catastrophic failures inevitable (or only barely evitable at the last possible instant).

 

[Doomsday]

^In reality, the goal of engineering design is to make catastrophic failures impossible. In action-adventure storytelling, the goal of engineering design is to make catastrophic failures inevitable (or only barely evitable at the last possible instant).

This is quite true, and I accept that as the basis for conflict in drama and in action/adventure(even in comedy, for that matter).

It's just that in a continuing series, it begins to strain credulity when it happens multiple times and isn't corrected.

The first time that warp core ejection systems were offline, I(as a fictional Captain) would not leave dry dock again without some kind of manual override being in place.

This is the same criticism I have often leveled toward TOS regarding the parallel worlds concept. Outside of the context of a unifying theory to explain it, using that same premise over and over in a series is sloppy writing.

 

[Warped9]

The thing about TOS (and many earlier series) is that they then didn't have any idea whatsoever that the show would be scrutinized so closely and debated for over forty years. After the show was ended they thought, "Well, that's that. On to the next job."

Mind you today they claim to care about consistency because the fans are paying attention, but they still screw up anyway.

 

[Maurice]

The bigger problem is that the writers were too unimaginative to come up with other ways to endanger the ship than causing the engines to go boom.