Using Alan Sinclair TOS .dwg for my project

[circusdog]

You can do a pretty good job of the "plate" you mention just from Alan's drawings... the shape isn't terribly complex. There are minor differences in this between the first-pilot, second pilot, and production versions, however, involving the thin strip going down the center.

In any case, I just used Alan's drawing there for my primary reference, along with a few screen-caps from the couple of times on-screen that we see that part of the ship, and a couple of photos from the Smithsonian restoration record... and it turned out quite nicely.

Ok, I'll muddle on then. I may lean towards my AMT round 2 kit for help.

The three little tabs around the nacelle caps (often referred to as the bussard collectors) are actually little metal brackets mounted into the wood of the nacelle body. They have small screws going in, facing towards the nacelle axis, to hold the frosted dome in place. They are just metal strips, rounded on the end. If you watch closely... or better yet, head over to the Smithsonian... you can see the screws!

I had a feeling that was what they were. Too funny! I have one drawing that shows bump-outs in those positions, probably covers that were lost. Maybe I'll ltry to model that instead of straps. It looks more space-worthy.

Thanks!

 

[circusdog]

Here's my primary hull so far:

On the impulse drive, it appears that there is some grooveworking on the rounded edges in some sketches and plans, but my AMT model lacks this detail. Is it grooved, or just a different color from the body?

 

[blssdwlf]

Hopefully these reference sites will aid you on some of the detailing

http://www.modelermagic.com/?p=8672

http://www.startrekpropauthority.com/2008/05/uss-enterprise-original-series-11-foot.html

http://www.flickr.com/photos/retroweb/3826803224/in/photostream/

http://fiveprime.org/hivemind/Tags/enterprise,smithsonian/Interesting

 

[circusdog]

Hopefully these reference sites will aid you on some of the detailing

http://www.modelermagic.com/?p=8672

This one was particularly awesome! Thanks!

 

[publiusr]

Interesting work here:
http://the-grey-ghost.com/

Scroll down for blueprints

 

[circusdog]

Interesting work here:
http://the-grey-ghost.com/

Scroll down for blueprints

Now there is a serious modeler, building his own paint shop and all. These projects are incredible. I am way out of his league.

It has some nice shots of the "accellerator" I was having trouble with. I guess my biggest problem is version control.

I went to startrek.com to look at some of the original TOS shows, and immediately noticed different features on the ship in the first few episodes.

Episode 1 - "The Man Trap", production 6 has no probes on the bussard collectors and has spheres on rear of nacelles in the starting sequence, but has the rear grillwork nacelles in the title sequence.

Episode 3 - "Where No Man Has Gone Before", production 2 has the rear grillwork nacelles.

 

[blssdwlf]

Yeah - and you'll notice the bridge dome taller or shorter depending if you're looking at the pilot or non-pilot version of the ship. I think in some of Sinclair's blueprints these differences are detailed out.

You can try and model them as completely separate "upgrades" over the years or settle on one "definitive" version or go a little nuts and reconcile it as a "transformable" ship. I ended up going with the last option It's all good which ever way you end up going

 

[Cary L. Brown]

Yeah - and you'll notice the bridge dome taller or shorter depending if you're looking at the pilot or non-pilot version of the ship. I think in some of Sinclair's blueprints these differences are detailed out.

You can try and model them as completely separate "upgrades" over the years or settle on one "definitive" version or go a little nuts and reconcile it as a "transformable" ship. I ended up going with the last option It's all good which ever way you end up going

You made the Enterprise a Transformer???

Okay, I've gotta ask... how did you manage that?

 

[circusdog]

You can try and model them as completely separate "upgrades" over the years or settle on one "definitive" version or go a little nuts and reconcile it as a "transformable" ship. I ended up going with the last option It's all good which ever way you end up going

I guess you would have to document all the differences first. The ship isn't in a lot of scenes, and looking at the original videos is nostalgic and sad at the same time. The remastered ones are like a work of art, not faithful to the original, but the ship seems to be consistent.

My AMT kit has 4 decal options - production, pilot 1, pilot 2 and mirror universe versions. Their illustration of the production model has no spikes and the rear sphere, but the other three versions show the spikes and rear grills. The spikes and grills are not included in the molded parts.

 

[circusdog]

Okay, I've gotta ask... how did you manage that?

I had the same thought, since Inventor has alternate representations on assemblies. You can model individual parts (nacelles, saucer, bridge, sec hull) then make alternate parts by using the "derive" feature then adding the different bits (colors, decals, etc). Then assemble the parts placing them where they belong. You can create different representations by suppressing the appropriate parts in the model.

By using "derive", if the base part needs to be changed, all parts derived from it will get the change. You can even derive a mirrored part. That's how I am doing the nacelles.

 

[Cary L. Brown]

Okay, I've gotta ask... how did you manage that?

I had the same thought, since Inventor has alternate representations on assemblies. You can model individual parts (nacelles, saucer, bridge, sec hull) then make alternate parts by using the "derive" feature then adding the different bits (colors, decals, etc). Then assemble the parts placing them where they belong. You can create different representations by suppressing the appropriate parts in the model.

By using "derive", if the base part needs to be changed, all parts derived from it will get the change. You can even derive a mirrored part. That's how I am doing the nacelles.

There's more than just that, though... different paint jobs, different markings, different window locations, etc.

I thought he meant that he designed a ship that would (in the "onscreen state") somehow transform between the different versions... like the aft nacelle domes (what I consider to be the primary subspace field generation points on the TOS ship) which are there in some shots and not in others...

 

[circusdog]

I thought he meant that he designed a ship that would (in the "onscreen state") somehow transform between the different versions... like the aft nacelle domes (what I consider to be the primary subspace field generation points on the TOS ship) which are there in some shots and not in others...

I hope blssdwlf replies. It should prove interesting.

What do you mean by "onscreen state"? When (if) I finish my CAD model, I can make a presentation file that goes through the different representations (I think) and export it to an avi or dwf.

 

[Cary L. Brown]

I thought he meant that he designed a ship that would (in the "onscreen state") somehow transform between the different versions... like the aft nacelle domes (what I consider to be the primary subspace field generation points on the TOS ship) which are there in some shots and not in others...

I hope blssdwlf replies. It should prove interesting.

What do you mean by "onscreen state"? When (if) I finish my CAD model, I can make a presentation file that goes through the different representations (I think) and export it to an avi or dwf.

I mean... during the course of an episode, we often saw various clips of stock footage of the Enterprise... including quite a bit of the first and second pilot-state model, right alongside shots of the production-state model.

You could do a single model which would be able to be modified, easily, into any of those. I thought he meant making it so that the thing would translate between them, in "real time" during the episode... like, as I said, a "transformer."

 

[circusdog]

You could do a single model which would be able to be modified, easily, into any of those.

Yeah, that is my new goal.

I thought he meant making it so that the thing would translate between them, in "real time" during the episode... like, as I said, a "transformer."

So, like a fan flick? Sam Witwicky meets Captain Kirk?

Would the Enterprise be a Transformer or a Decepticon?

 

[KNH]

Would the Enterprise be a Transformer or a Decepticon?

Should be a Transformer.

Just so we can have an awesome dogfight scene with Astrotrain.

 

[blssdwlf]

LOL, the Enterprise is a Variable-ship (Macross) I posted a quick example on my thread here:

http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=5075257&postcount=329

There is enough room in the end of the nacelle to make it work like a transformer

As to the front of the nacelles, just have a retractable spike and domes that can switch between opaque and translucent...

 

[circusdog]

I just wanted to make a quick post so you'll know I'm still working...

Thanks to the links provided, I found a good shot of the "accellerator". It is a clip from "Doomsday Machine" and shows Decker's wreck between the Enterprise's nacelles. The part looks more rounded at the rear than most drawings I have seen. The pics from the 11 ft model during renovation doesn't show the end I am talking about.

The "Doomsday" shot is funny. You can see the wires for the lights running up the nacelle support.

Here is the remastered shot.

 

[circusdog]

I can give you quite a few "pointers" if you'd like them.

@Cary:
Can you give me some pointers on making the windows in Inventor?

I used "decal" to place an image on the hull, but it doesn't look very good. I would rather "extrude" or "emboss" them so I can change their appearance, but placing work planes to get a sketch to line up is driving me nuts.

I don't have any experience with "faces" except for a rather simple tutorial session.

Thanks!

 

[Cary L. Brown]

Hi Circusdog...

I didn't do a whole lot of surface-based work in Inventor when I was using it, but I'm pretty sure that Autodesk implemented a full surface-based subsystem in there, didn't they?

If you revisit my thread, you'll see the approach I used in Pro/E to do this. I gave an example of how to do it relating to the "primary hull underside triangles" (what I consider to be the transporter antennae).

You'll need to figure out the basics in Inventor for how to do this, but the process will likely be very similar.

Check this out... I hope it'll help:

http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=2894783&postcount=60

 

[circusdog]

Check this out... I hope it'll help:

Funny, I was just over there, drooling...

I get the impression that you have loads of work planes. Maybe I am just shy about loading up my "tree". I get nervous when the browser window is full even when collapsed.

I guess the big difference is scope. I'm in a small pond of goo, trying just to implement Sinclair's 2D work in Inventor, while you have re-mastered the grey lady from the inside-out and outside-in, accompanied by some Vulcan-worthy logic.