accurate Oberth-Class schematics

[Reverend]

Ok, before I commit any time to this, I want to put out some feelers and see how much interest there is in cooking up some proper, accurate plans for the Oberth Class (and YES I am talking about the Grissom design, deal with it!)
After a quick read through Bernd's Oberth scale article on Ex-Astris, I can see that several of the problems he's highlighted stem from inaccurate schematics from both the encyclopaedia and the Fact Files.
So what I'm after from you lot is any reference shots you can find of the miniature (particularly BTS shots) as after a good 30mins googleing, i can only find a handful of usable photos and most of them taken from the same angle.
This will be ongoing, so I'll post my first WIP as soon as I can gauge what the level of interest is going to be.
I know this sort of thing usually goes in the Art board, but I kind of want this to be more of a technical exercise than an artistic one.

 

[Mysterion]

I'd be interested in seeing it.

You might be interested in checking out the plans and cutaway these folks have done:

http://www.ussthagard.net/Thagardtour.html

Can't speak for the accuracy per se, but it is an interesting interpretation, IMO.

 

[Slappy The Vulcan]

Id be interested in seeing something like this...I will have to dig around, I found a pretty interesting fan set of schematics. But it had some rather silly additions (A fighter hangar, a auditorium for the captain to announce discovery to the crew, and a couple of others) but I did like the lab and quarters layouts. Ive always liked the oberth class ship, Its a clean design, and it looks like an explorer. so Im throwing my lot in support.

 

[Slappy The Vulcan]

Actually the poster above me found it

 

[Reverend]

I'm going to try not to be influenced too much by existing blueprints (save those of the actual model builders if pos) and instead focusing on primary data sources such as photos and DVD caps of the actual minature.

 

[Mysterion]

I'm going to try not to be influenced too much by existing blueprints (save those of the actual model builders if pos) and instead focusing on primary data sources such as photos and DVD caps of the actual minature.

Well, with all the so-varied stuff out there, that's probably the best way to go actually.

 

[Bill Morris]

Here's the Jackill cutaway, maybe not much help:
http://www.strekschematics.utvinternet.com/cutaways/jackillcut/oberthcutaway.jpg

You've already mentioned this, but for everyone else's reference, Ex Astris Scientia has quite a bit of Oberth discussion and images:
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/oberth-size.htm


I don't know what you have in mind for an end product of this project, but if you do come up with a new cutaway, I would be happy to set it into an LCARS 24 library page on that ship credited to you for users to enjoy if it's in a style and size like this.

Image file contributed to LCARS 24 Libary by http://www.explorermedia.net

The program takes care of labels, like this:
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y247/LCARS24user/NOVA-L24.png

I suppose you've seen this, as well:

 

[Reverend]

Well I might try to recreate the MSD at some future point, but to start with I'm only going to focus on getting the exterior plans as correct as possible.
Having said that I do have some ideas as the the internal layout, mostly to do with it's inherent modularity and the function of those large dark panels on the outer hull.

 

[Cary L. Brown]

Hi Reverend...

If you're going for the exteriors-only... your best bet, really, is to go 3D and just do mo-cap type work off of the DVDs (most 3D packages have that capability these days, in one form or another... I'm sure you're aware of that).

I'd be interested as to your take on the Grisson's functionality. I've said before that I believe that the big underslung element isn't even "really" habitable... it's a huge freakin' sensor module. The Grissom was never really a "starship" as much as it was a support platform for a huge high-power, hi-resolution sensor. Hence why it was sent to Genesis, and why the Captain wasn't really anxious to send down crew to do in-person investigation. It wasn't really his JOB. His job was just to take some scans and go home, and leave the more detailed on-site work to follow-on surveys.

 

[Reverend]

Hi Reverend...

If you're going for the exteriors-only... your best bet, really, is to go 3D and just do mo-cap type work off of the DVDs (most 3D packages have that capability these days, in one form or another... I'm sure you're aware of that).

Actually no, not a clue. I'm strictly a 2D artist/draughtsperson as on the odd occasion I've dabbled in 3D I couldn't even manage simple geometric shapes.
Though if anyone else can mo-cap from a DVD I'd be curious to see the results.

I'd be interested as to your take on the Grisson's functionality. I've said before that I believe that the big underslung element isn't even "really" habitable... it's a huge freakin' sensor module. The Grissom was never really a "starship" as much as it was a support platform for a huge high-power, hi-resolution sensor. Hence why it was sent to Genesis, and why the Captain wasn't really anxious to send down crew to do in-person investigation. It wasn't really his JOB. His job was just to take some scans and go home, and leave the more detailed on-site work to follow-on surveys.

I wouldn't say it's totally uninhabited. Certainly the forward bow would be the main sensor array and possibly a smaller on on the tail (depending on what kind of reference anyone can dig up) but I picture the entire upper quarter of the secondary hull being taken up by the deuterium tanks, the warp reactor sitting in the middle between the pylons with a modest main engineering and the area aft of the pylons to the tail (the bit behind the dark grey panel) would be where the internal modular sections go.
As for the rest of the ship, the two deck saucer is almost exclusively the crew's habitat and the deck below (the bit flat piece the nacelles sit on) contains the lateral sensors, the planetary sensor dome, the labs and possibly the landing bays. I'm also wondering if the bridge should be on deck 3, below the saucer, or in the saucer itself.

 

[Timo]

I wouldn't wonder a bit if the ship were originally built in a main hull + uncrewed pod configuration, but later on things began to "seep" into the pod. By the 24th century, designers would have added shirtsleeves workspaces there, then some bunks for people operating in those spaces, then proper cabins... And at some point it might have been decided that the original powerplant was too weak and there was no room for a better one up there, so room was made for a TNG-style vertical core in the middle of the pod.

Stranger things have been done aboard the waterborne vessels of today and yesterday... And constant upgrading and filling in of formerly "empty" spaces would explain the longevity of the type.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Santaman]

I always believed that the warpcore and the other more dangerous stuff like antimatter/Deuterium were fitted inside the secundairy hull, else there wouldn't have been a need at all for the nacelle pylons, those are there because usually necks and pylons are/were there to keep a distance between the dangerous stuff and the largest part of the crew.
The same goes for the more dangerous laboratory's, those and the probe launchers and possibly high powered sensors should be kept away from the crew.

The only "problem" there is with the Oberth is the way to get down there, I know that in Trek they usually use turbilifts but in the case of the Oberth I think they simply installed a lift with a rotating inner cage/cab so everyone stays upright when traveling up or down, I always assumed that the Oberth was kinda a 'Russian" design, which means no fancy stuff, only machinery thats very reliable and easy to fix, kinda like a T-34 tank, ugly, yes, with a lot of flaws, yes, but reliable like nothing else.

My 2 euro cents...

 

[Cary L. Brown]

Hi Reverend...

If you're going for the exteriors-only... your best bet, really, is to go 3D and just do mo-cap type work off of the DVDs (most 3D packages have that capability these days, in one form or another... I'm sure you're aware of that).

Actually no, not a clue. I'm strictly a 2D artist/draughtsperson as on the odd occasion I've dabbled in 3D I couldn't even manage simple geometric shapes.
Though if anyone else can mo-cap from a DVD I'd be curious to see the results.

Well, the basic idea is that you set up certain points... say, the "point" on the top edge of the sensor pod bow... and build up a wire-frame basic version. You then adjust the points to match actual frame-grabs. If you adjust the same set of points to match up in every single frame, you've got the shape down very closely. The more sampling points you take, the more accurate the shape (but the more work you have to do).

Once you've got the shape worked out (and matching all of the on-screen frames you've decided to compare against) you can "project" the on-screen graphics as a texture... it's not going to be high-resolution but it'll give you a pretty good idea of "what goes where and why."

So, you'd have the appearance matching, the shape matching, and the orientation matching all worked out. It's not an instantaneous, "press the magic button and its done" thing. It's labor-intensive. But it works pretty well, and this is how they do most digital-set-to-real-actor matching work, for example... the "dots" on the real (green) set are the references that they match the digital set against.

You'd basically be doing the same thing, but in reverse. You can do it with lesser tools, as well... but it's easier if you've got a manipulable 3D tool to work with.

 

[Reverend]

I wouldn't wonder a bit if the ship were originally built in a main hull + uncrewed pod configuration, but later on things began to "seep" into the pod. By the 24th century, designers would have added shirtsleeves workspaces there, then some bunks for people operating in those spaces, then proper cabins... And at some point it might have been decided that the original powerplant was too weak and there was no room for a better one up there, so room was made for a TNG-style vertical core in the middle of the pod.

Stranger things have been done aboard the waterborne vessels of today and yesterday... And constant upgrading and filling in of formerly "empty" spaces would explain the longevity of the type.

Timo Saloniemi

I'm working from the idea that from the get-go, the internal modules on the aft ventral quarter were totally reconfigurable. Though in the early days, it was quite often the case that the only access was to the reactor and then only via jefferies tubes or EVA to an external airlock. As technology moved on (keeping in mind I place this design on the late 22nd century) the equipment became less bulky, missions became longer and longer as the frontier expanded so the equipment to crew ratio began to shift.
This to me would be the very reason why the design survived nearly 200 years, it proved to be extremely easy to adapt and internally reconfigure without major modifications to the outer hull. So while other ships of it's kind came and went as they became obsolete, this thing was the energiser bunny of starship design.

...The only "problem" there is with the Oberth is the way to get down there, I know that in Trek they usually use turbilifts but in the case of the Oberth I think they simply installed a lift with a rotating inner cage/cab so everyone stays upright when traveling up or down, I always assumed that the Oberth was kinda a 'Russian" design, which means no fancy stuff, only machinery thats very reliable and easy to fix, kinda like a T-34 tank, ugly, yes, with a lot of flaws, yes, but reliable like nothing else.

My 2 euro cents...

The solution is far easier than you make it out to be. Hard linked transporters. And if those go down, there's always the jefferies tubes and stairwells in the pylons or the inspection pod and the external airlocks.

As for the design origins, I'm thinking - partly to justify the look of the thing dating back to the 2180's/90's is that it's partly of Vulcan design.
The way I see it; the reason why it looks so radically different from most other Starfleet ships of the time is because it was mostly designed and built by Vulcans. Just as it seams logical that the very first Federation Starfleet ships would have been made up of already serving vessels from Earth, Vulcan, Andoria et al. It stands to reason that the second generation would be a mix of hybrid designs as each world would still be making ship's semi-independently but with more and more influence from other worlds.
So the Oberth is a Vulcan design that has been heavily influenced by Earth tech, but still retains it's cultural aesthetic.


Ok, this is what I've got so far.

...and this is mostly what I'm going on.

 

[Santaman]

The solution is far easier than you make it out to be. Hard linked transporters. And if those go down, there's always the jefferies tubes and stairwells in the pylons or the inspection pod and the external airlocks.

Thats easier, true, but also too expensive and elaborate for a humble ship like the Oberth IMO.

As for Jefferies tubes, you will seriously piss off your engineers if you make them climb all the way down there..

 

[Reverend]

By expensive I'm assuming you mean energy consumption. I don't think it's ever been stated that transporter technology is particularly energy hungry compared to other ship systems. I mean, it's a small ship but it still has a M/AM reactor, so I don't foresee a problem. Besides, being hard linked the matter streams aren't being projected across thousands of miles in the way they're usually employed so any energy drain would be minimal. Aside from that it's not like there's going to be a constant stream of people moving back and forth between the hulls, for the most part it's just going to be at the shift change.

As for the engineers, I imagine they spend most of they working lives in one jefferies tube or another, so I doubt they'd notice the difference.

The simple fact is that those pylons are too narrow and the corners too tight for a turbolift to be practical. In fact I'd be surprised if a ship this small has more that two vertical shafts anyway. It's not like it'd take more than a few minutes to walk to anywhere on the ship anyway.

 

[Bill Morris]

Hard-linked transporter, huh? Beam by wire, over a data bus or something. Hm. A changling could travel by pipe, even. The Steamrunner class has the same problem. Sounds like you solved it, even if it does seem a weird way to commute.

 

[Timo]

The simple fact is that those pylons are too narrow and the corners too tight for a turbolift to be practical.

How so?

Even the slimmest interpretations of the pylons seem to be at least two meter wide, which is plenty for a personnel elevator. And I don't see any real corners there that a 2 m x 2 m x 1 m rectangular cabin couldn't negotiate.

And the direction of down would be meaningless with artificial gravity. For all we know, the decks on the pod are laid at right angles wrt the decks in the saucer, which already requires the lift to rotate through 90 degrees.

But with artificial gravity, one could do much more practical things as well. Such as slides that go down both ways.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Santaman]

By expensive I'm assuming you mean energy consumption.

I actually meant the technology and the price of the components the Oberth is a very small ship which has been build in large numbers so that would mean they would skimp on anything even remotely fancy, why install a hardwired transporter system when a simple lift would suffice?
I assume this goes for the rest of the ship as well except the sensors and other things required to do science.

 

[Bill Morris]

That actually looks pretty nice so far. One thing, though: I think your lighting source on the saucer section in your dorsal view is wrong. It makes it look convex. It's easiest to see looking at your posted thumbnail. Oh, and the part aft of the saucer section is supposed to be flat.

Now, what do you think about the opinion stated at Ex Astris Scientia about the overall length?