Have you seen this starship?

[Wingsley]

Ever notice how the schematic drawing of the TOS Starship Enterprise, the one in the turbolift area of the Bridge opposite the "Starship Class" dedication plaque, only vaguely resembles the Enterprise herself? Ever notice how different those schematics actually are from the "real" Enterprise?

That schematic plaque, along with an obviously derivative computer display discovered by the Klingons in "Day of the Dove", seem to bear some resemblance to one of Jefferies' early drawings of the "final" Starship Enterprise from about 1964. I'm wondering if anyone ever developed that specific concept and made newer drawings/models/3D CGI of that "ship".

Has anyone ever developed that imagery? I ask this because, as we all, know several other of Jefferies' early drawings have been developed either by the studio or by fans as either starships or images of ships. I'm wondering if anyone ever developed this particular one.

 

[Finn]

Looks the same to me

 

[Wingsley]

I agree. They do indeed look the same.

 

[AnyStar]

if memory serves correctly...

i believe thats not a cross section diagram the way you think. i believe that is a "quick look" readout for airtight hull pressure levels. so you arent looking at a diagram, but sections of containment areas within the hull itself

 

[Wingsley]

^ You are referring to the diagram that Kang & his gang found. You are correct.

That doesn't explain the plaque on the Bridge, however.

 

[SonicRanger]

This started a tradition of inaccurate illustrations on the bridge, like the Phase II version on the TMP and TWOK bridge or the FJ version in TSFS.

 

[Captain Robert April]

My theory depends on the time the bridge set was completed and shooting began on that set compared to when the plans for the miniature were actually finalized and the first model was completed (the 33" model was presented to Roddenberry while they were filming the Rigel VII fight scene), but my suspicion is that Matt Jefferies was still finalizing the design when construction was underway on the sets, and they needed something for technical graphics, and since they were only background set dressing that nobody was going to see very clearly anyway, it didn't matter that it wasn't the final design, it was close enough for a show that was gonna be lucky to even be picked up (the vast majority of pilots go nowhere, remember). Certainly, nobody was gonna give a rip in five years, let alone forty.

 

[Wingsley]

Yeah, fat chance of that!

I'd love to see someone with 3d skills bring this "ship" to life.

 

[Shaw]

Well, I've started a scratch-build of a version that is about 18" long using this as a general reference guide...

Click to enlarge​

Mainly to see what the model Jefferies described here would have looked like.

Matt Jefferies (describing events of August 1964):
"By the third time around he had two sheets of eight or ten drawings, plus a half dozen good-size renderings. One of them was the beginning of the design finally chosen and one that I liked very much... an upper, saucer-shaped hull, a cigar-shaped lower hull, and two engine pods. Before calling everyone in again, I did a little fast model building. I went down to the mill [woodworking shop], grabbed a couple of chunks of wood, and had the men turn out the saucer shape on a lathe. In about thirty-five to forty minutes I had a model. We hung it up on a piece of thread and called everyone in. Oddly enough, the original model was hung upside down as opposed to the way we use it now."

"Based on that model and the color renderings I had prepared for it, Roddenberry felt we were on the right track. We wound up shortening the main pylon strut and made a few other little changes and then sat down to to some scale drawings."​

As for the continued use of the graphics, I can't stress enough how hard producing graphics was back then. There was a good chance that the plans Jefferies gave to Datin on November 7, 1964 were the only copy of the final plans. And even making notes, Jefferies would reuse earlier plans rather than redraw everything from scratch.

And drawing was significantly harder when done by hand. I made a number of plans in 1990-91 that utilized traditional techniques (ink on vellum) and everything took much longer than it does today with computers. Plus copying was also harder. My father work for Ditto as a service tech in the 1960s and had his own business servicing blueprint copiers in the 1970s (along with a drafting supply store), so I got to see first hand how much of that type of work was done. And I actually learned most of what I know about drafting talking with his clients while he was fixing their machines.

Creating the bridge and display graphics was even harder because the final work would have to be very clean and photographed to make the larger negative graphic. This was one of the main reasons why the smaller displays didn't change much (even from the original pilot through to the final season) and few graphics were made for the larger overhead displays. The graphic for "What Are Little Girls Made Of?" was reused in the sickbay of the Defiant in "The Tholian Web" because they couldn't afford to waste things like that. Which is also why the two graphics made for "The Enterprise Incident" should be given more weight as they were extremely hard (and expensive) to produce. Both Spock's and Sulu's personal viewers were way to imply they were seeing a lot of detailed information with lines of dialog rather than expensive graphics.

But back to the topic... aridas has done a ton of work in integrating many of the earlier Jefferies designs in to a starship evolution (most of which can be found here).

 

[STR]

This started a tradition of inaccurate illustrations on the bridge, like the Phase II version on the TMP and TWOK bridge or the FJ version in TSFS.

Add to the TSFS mess-up is the security readout that labels the Enterprise as "NCC-1700."

 

[Forbin]

Think of it as a NY subway map. Those aren't geographically/cartograhically accurate. They're simplified so they can be read quickly and easily.

 

[Captain Robert April]

^ Works for me.

 

[Wingsley]

Maybe the bridge plaque could be explained that way.

Now, on to the Jefferies drawing: has anyone ever developed that?

 

[AnyStar]

Matt Jefferies (describing events of August 1964):
"Oddly enough, the original model was hung upside down as opposed to the way we use it now."
​

​

wow, i have a few doodles of 1701-e style ship in that "inverted" style. i'd never heard that story before!

 

[thesovereignman]

When I was little, I had a toy 1701-D. I liked it alot better upside down. So did roddenberry, as it was a point of contention between the two. Roddenberry liked it better upside down, according to an interview with jefferies.

 

[The Castellan]

Looks nice. I wonder what one could use that design for now?

 

[Wingsley]

I was thinking it would be great for either my Declaration or Magna Carta concepts.

Here's my supposition: earlier-vintage starships like 1017 Constellation and 1371 Republic were originally built as part of the cruiser starship classes in operation of their respective eras. Some of the ships of these older classes were "super-refit", or reconstructed, (torn apart and their components recycled) to "join" the "new" latest starship class. I call these earlier cruiser classes Declaration (late 22nd century / early Federation era) and Magna Carta (early 23rd century). So some Declarations were rebuilt as Magna Cartas, and some Magna Cartas were rebuilt as Constitutions.

I look at this Jefferies drawing, and I'm thinking it could've been a Declaration or a Magna Carta. Some of the details would have to change to make it fit. As with the TAS Bonaventure, these earlier starship classes were rougher and less elegant in their overall appearance. Maybe each of these earlier classes evolved over time as well, just as the Constitution did. If we assume a starship class is simply a spec that ships from various Federation member-worlds are built to, maybe the spec have at least a couple of different revisions (Magna Carta, Block 1 would be, say, 2205, and Magna Carta, Block 2 would be 2225).

I like this Jefferies drawing. If you look at it and then look at the NuTrek Kelvin, I see echoes of the Jefferies drawing's influence there. Maybe with some tweaks it would fit into a cruiser-starship-class evolution timeline. Think "where Jefferies has gone before".