Why do I have a sneaky suspicion another meltdown is in progress?
Deck Plans V: The Not-So-Final Go Around
- Thread starter Captain Robert April
- Start date
Yah. The fanboys are so pseudo.
Wait, are they pseudo as in "pseudo establishment", or are they fanon as in "stuck with the fanon doctrine"? I can't keep up with who's mud is being slung, or who's meltdown is in progress.
All I know is that it was me that made the original recommendation to the esteemed lord of the thread that he could -- per Matt Jefferies' own art -- drop the bridge to achieve his desired rotation. I didn't rotate it on my own plans because Jefferies didn't quite drop the thing enough to pull it off, and he showed a turbolift shaft going straight to the bridge, but it's perfectly reasonable to drop the thing a few feet more and achieve the helm-forward configuration. It only depends on whether you are being a strict or loose constructionist in these Jefferies matters. I personally have no problem with the treknical activist POV, as long as a person identifies what they are doing and doesn't try to pass off their ideas as the MJ gospel. I guess that makes me a regular Warren E. Burger- or is that a Richard K. Berman?
There's no need to beat your chest and say "My way won and everybody that disagrees with me is an intolerant fraud" (or "stuck" and "pseudo", or whatever it was) when that's not --at all -- accurate.
Wait, are they pseudo as in "pseudo establishment", or are they fanon as in "stuck with the fanon doctrine"? I can't keep up with who's mud is being slung, or who's meltdown is in progress.
All I know is that it was me that made the original recommendation to the esteemed lord of the thread that he could -- per Matt Jefferies' own art -- drop the bridge to achieve his desired rotation. I didn't rotate it on my own plans because Jefferies didn't quite drop the thing enough to pull it off, and he showed a turbolift shaft going straight to the bridge, but it's perfectly reasonable to drop the thing a few feet more and achieve the helm-forward configuration. It only depends on whether you are being a strict or loose constructionist in these Jefferies matters. I personally have no problem with the treknical activist POV, as long as a person identifies what they are doing and doesn't try to pass off their ideas as the MJ gospel. I guess that makes me a regular Warren E. Burger- or is that a Richard K. Berman?
There's no need to beat your chest and say "My way won and everybody that disagrees with me is an intolerant fraud" (or "stuck" and "pseudo", or whatever it was) when that's not --at all -- accurate.
Yeesh, see, this is the kind of extreme over-reaction I'm talking about. Here we go agaaaaaaaaaaaaaain. Maybe you misunderstood, but pseudo in this case simply meant fake, or unofficial. maybe 'loose affiliation' is a better phrase? Whatever.
Well, in this case, you can have it one way or the other and still be in line with what Jefferies wanted. Strictly, the bridge is facing forward. Also, it isn't sunken. But having it both ways is a technical impossibility, so...Pick one, they're both Jefferies 'Gospel'. Either way also requires that you ignore Jefferies to a certain degree.
The concept of WWJD is all guess-work when it comes to the finer details, As such, I think it's fine to use it as long as you think from the Jefferies perspective, which we do know a bit about.
No. Strictly.
I hope the crowd saw my joke and realized I was laughing at the two of you and take absolutely nothing in this thread or forum seriously, 'cause it takes too long to come up with this material if the rest of them aren't reading it.
What, 2 minutes? Is this also pseudo-humor?
It's strange, this sort of utter lack of communication only happens to me usually in political threads. You know, the one where no matter how you phrase something or how mild and accepting you are the other guy is out for blood for some unknown reason. It's all good though, I've come to expect it.
WWJD works thusly: If I were to explain to Jefferies the physical problem with the bridge, and asked him to fix it without changing the exterior, would he 1. rotate it, or 2. Sink it down a few feet. My guess is choice 2.
I hope not...
I don't have any real issues with April's view points or his efforts. I only suggest that he show tolerance and understanding for people that don't agree with him.
What I think has happened here is that he has (I assume) fought this fight so many times in the past that his first instinct is to jump into fight mode when he is confronted with other people's opinions.
What I advocate is mutual respect for everyone's opinions.
Almost all of us here have invested hours (days, weeks or even years) to Trek related projects. As much as beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so is art. Trek is art, and all of us are beholders of it. It means something different to each of us and we all see it differently, but that is not a good reason for insulting people with a different take on it.
I would hope that April would acknowledge what I'm saying and start taking a less emotionally attached view to other people's opinions and beliefs. And similarly, I'd be the first to jump in to his defense if someone took the same attitude towards him.
At HobbyTalk, he has argued this issue over and over even when it really wasn't the subject of the discussion. While I admire his passion... the repetition starts to ware on the nerves a little. It tends to feel a lot like a Christian hard sell when face with infidels (like me).
I'd like to remind folks that 1) that cutaway that Jefferies did was to convey the size of the ship, not provide a detailed layout, and 2) it's small enough to fit on a piece of typing paper, and was drawn with a pen that laid down a fairly thick line, so precision wasn't exactly a priority. It also only has eight decks in the primary hull, but that's another matter.
So, once again, my theory as to what Jefferies would do if he was commissioned to do a set of deck plans that reconciled the interior with the exterior, with regard to the bridge he'd either lower it, slide it forward a bit, enlarge the dome, or enlarge the whole ship, since the 947' figure was most likely a figure pulled out of the air anyway. But offsetting the interior would not be an option, because the concept would fly in the face of everything he knew about ships. Hence, why the concept of an offset bridge is a complete nonstarter for me and others.
So, once again, my theory as to what Jefferies would do if he was commissioned to do a set of deck plans that reconciled the interior with the exterior, with regard to the bridge he'd either lower it, slide it forward a bit, enlarge the dome, or enlarge the whole ship, since the 947' figure was most likely a figure pulled out of the air anyway. But offsetting the interior would not be an option, because the concept would fly in the face of everything he knew about ships. Hence, why the concept of an offset bridge is a complete nonstarter for me and others.
^ It only has 8 (and a half) decks because that's how many reasonably fit. 11 decks makes for very, very low ceilings.
On the offset bridge, it's more likely MJ was well aware of the geometric reality and chose to ignore it. Who knew it would not only be noticed but cause sporadic debates among fans for 40 years! (I personally didn't notice it before FJ pointed it out, but others (e.g., MGagen) have stated they noticed it during the original run of the series.)
Leaving the bridge alone for now (we've beaten it quite enough over the years and are no closer to consensus and further from a settlement, what with MJ dead and all), let's get back to crew quarters...
The idea that the non-officer crew had shared sleeping arrangements is reasonable, but we clearly saw Rand in a captain-sized room. Are we to dismiss that as some exceptional arrangement?
(Uhura likewise had such a room -- that she temporarily vacated for the benefit of Elaan of Troyius -- but at least she was a Lieutenant.)
(If we're to dismiss canon, I favor dismissing "over 400" and going with 203 or so.)
On the offset bridge, it's more likely MJ was well aware of the geometric reality and chose to ignore it. Who knew it would not only be noticed but cause sporadic debates among fans for 40 years! (I personally didn't notice it before FJ pointed it out, but others (e.g., MGagen) have stated they noticed it during the original run of the series.)
Leaving the bridge alone for now (we've beaten it quite enough over the years and are no closer to consensus and further from a settlement, what with MJ dead and all), let's get back to crew quarters...
The idea that the non-officer crew had shared sleeping arrangements is reasonable, but we clearly saw Rand in a captain-sized room. Are we to dismiss that as some exceptional arrangement?
(Uhura likewise had such a room -- that she temporarily vacated for the benefit of Elaan of Troyius -- but at least she was a Lieutenant.)
(If we're to dismiss canon, I favor dismissing "over 400" and going with 203 or so.)
Rand was the captain's personal yeoman, and Uhura was a department head. That alone garners them their own cabins.
Okay, so I've had a chance to look through this thread (I hadn't seen your drawings before yesterday, and I see this is something that you've been working on for some time), and I'd like to bring up some questions/comments...
Problem is, it wasn't the only time.
Back in 1977 Jefferies was doing the plans for the Enterprise to be used in Star Trek Phase II and unlike the ST:TMP refit, this was supposed to be a much more modest upgrade. And given that, the interior layout shouldn't be all that different... and when we compare his original cross section with the Phase II cross section we can see that they are a pretty good match.
So if I was going to attempt to guess at what Matt Jefferies would have for a cross section view of the Enterprise, these two references would be my starting point (for general deck placement, turbo lift shafts, etc.). Below is a quick comparison of both of Jefferies cross sections along with yours
Okay, why not just put the turbo lift directly behind the captain's chair?
See what is odd is that you are claiming to be doing plans the way Jefferies would have, yet you are taking massive liberties with most of his work.
Take for example your Subspace Radio Transceiver Array (which most people hold to be the top of the turbo lift shaft). Are you saying that Jefferies didn't intend that to be the turbo lift shaft? Lets go back to his drawings...
See, in his drawing it is the top of the shaft, and his solution in Phase II was to have two turbo lifts for the bridge. Are you saying that Jefferies thought the Enterprise needed two Subspace Radio Transceiver Arrays?
Honestly, if the producers, directors and art department all thought that no one would notice, then you should feel completely free to put the turbo lift alcove directly behind the captain's chair in your plans. All these other compromises you seem to be making because of this seem unjustified if no one was supposed to notice it anyways.
Obviously this is your project, so you can do what you want... but that would seem to me to be the path of least resistance.
But I have to say, I am inspired.
While I know that Jefferies wasn't so uncompromising as to consider an off set bridge a nonstarter, I am intrigued by the idea of putting together the Enterprise along the lines of how Jefferies envisioned it. It would make an interesting research project to try to figure out the general placement. I would stop before attempting what you are doing though (which seems to be an attempt to fill in the gaps with other references), but a study of this sounds interesting.
As Jefferies only has about 19 decks, I'm guessing I wouldn't make use of Michael Okuda's deck arrangement list:
I did find your duel engine rooms to be an interesting idea though. It solves a number of issues on the show were major parts of engineering disappeared and then reappeared within the same episode.
Hmmm... I could sorta see your point about the cross section if that was the only time Jefferies ever drew a cross section of the Enterprise.
Problem is, it wasn't the only time.
Back in 1977 Jefferies was doing the plans for the Enterprise to be used in Star Trek Phase II and unlike the ST:TMP refit, this was supposed to be a much more modest upgrade. And given that, the interior layout shouldn't be all that different... and when we compare his original cross section with the Phase II cross section we can see that they are a pretty good match.
So if I was going to attempt to guess at what Matt Jefferies would have for a cross section view of the Enterprise, these two references would be my starting point (for general deck placement, turbo lift shafts, etc.). Below is a quick comparison of both of Jefferies cross sections along with yours
So the question is, what would Jefferies do... and you are assuming that everything else about the Enterprise would be sacrificed by Jefferies to make the command module face forward.
Okay, why not just put the turbo lift directly behind the captain's chair?
See what is odd is that you are claiming to be doing plans the way Jefferies would have, yet you are taking massive liberties with most of his work.
Take for example your Subspace Radio Transceiver Array (which most people hold to be the top of the turbo lift shaft). Are you saying that Jefferies didn't intend that to be the turbo lift shaft? Lets go back to his drawings...
See, in his drawing it is the top of the shaft, and his solution in Phase II was to have two turbo lifts for the bridge. Are you saying that Jefferies thought the Enterprise needed two Subspace Radio Transceiver Arrays?
Honestly, if the producers, directors and art department all thought that no one would notice, then you should feel completely free to put the turbo lift alcove directly behind the captain's chair in your plans. All these other compromises you seem to be making because of this seem unjustified if no one was supposed to notice it anyways.
Obviously this is your project, so you can do what you want... but that would seem to me to be the path of least resistance.
But I have to say, I am inspired.
While I know that Jefferies wasn't so uncompromising as to consider an off set bridge a nonstarter, I am intrigued by the idea of putting together the Enterprise along the lines of how Jefferies envisioned it. It would make an interesting research project to try to figure out the general placement. I would stop before attempting what you are doing though (which seems to be an attempt to fill in the gaps with other references), but a study of this sounds interesting.
As Jefferies only has about 19 decks, I'm guessing I wouldn't make use of Michael Okuda's deck arrangement list:
- 01: Bridge
02: Science Labs
03: Science Labs, Life Support
04: Crew Quarters
05: Crew Quarters (including the Captain's)
06: Crew Quarters
07: Sickbay, Transporter Room, Briefing Room, Computer Core, Impulse Engines
08: Food Preparation, Recreation Deck, Laundry, Life Support
09: Freight and Cargo
10: Freight and Cargo
11: Phaser Control
12: Inertial Damping System, Observation Deck
13: Observation Deck, Dorsal Interconnects
14: Engineering Support, Water Storage
15: Deuterium Fuel Storage
16: Deuterium Fuel Storage
17: Crew Quarters
18: Power Distribution Subsystem
19: Main Engineering, Hanger Deck
20: Shuttlecraft Maintenance
21: Life Support, Cargo Bays
22: Cargo Bays
23: Antimatter Storage Pods
I did find your duel engine rooms to be an interesting idea though. It solves a number of issues on the show were major parts of engineering disappeared and then reappeared within the same episode.
The reason why I didn't move the turbolift behind Kirk's chair?
Because it wasn't behind Kirk's chair.
There's a big difference between tweaking a few things to make them fit and essentially telling the auidence that everything they saw in 79 episodes was a lie.
The interiors are what they are, and we're pretty much stuck with them.
Because it wasn't behind Kirk's chair.
There's a big difference between tweaking a few things to make them fit and essentially telling the auidence that everything they saw in 79 episodes was a lie.
The interiors are what they are, and we're pretty much stuck with them.
Well I haven't looked in on this discussion in a while, and it's nice to see that I didn't miss anything. I'd like to make a modest proposal about the ongoing debate here, if I may. In the interests of full disclosure that I really don't have a horse in the offset-bridge race. I never thought about it before perusing the FJ prints [and tacking them to the wall lol] as a high-school student in the 70s. I always figured that the reason the turbolift was not directly behind the conn was to improve the camera angles, giving them all three members of the conn plus Uhura and whoever came through the door in an easy shot. IMHO both the FJ and CRA solutions are interesting ones. While I'm also interested in what MJ might have wanted, in the end this is CRA's vision of something that was inconsistently presented at best and that's cool with me. I just want to see some fracking pics in this thread and not endless fanboy wrangling.
To be honest, I use this series of threads and the tenor of the debate therein as an example of internet excess and have for YEARS. It NEVER fails to get a reaction of either hilarity or disgust or both, even among hardcore fen. I was really impressed by a recent thread in the GenSF&F forum that actually managed to have a civilized discussion about the Star Wars OT/PT fight, which is traditionally as vitriolic an argument as anything in genre history... I'd like to think that here in what is supposed to be a community of artists and art appreciators, we'd be able to at least meet that standard.
If I cared how many pah-wraiths could dance on the head of a photon torpedo I'd be in the Trek Tech forum!
PICTURES!! I DEMAND PICTURES!!
:thumbsup:
To be honest, I use this series of threads and the tenor of the debate therein as an example of internet excess and have for YEARS. It NEVER fails to get a reaction of either hilarity or disgust or both, even among hardcore fen. I was really impressed by a recent thread in the GenSF&F forum that actually managed to have a civilized discussion about the Star Wars OT/PT fight, which is traditionally as vitriolic an argument as anything in genre history... I'd like to think that here in what is supposed to be a community of artists and art appreciators, we'd be able to at least meet that standard.
If I cared how many pah-wraiths could dance on the head of a photon torpedo I'd be in the Trek Tech forum!
PICTURES!! I DEMAND PICTURES!!
:thumbsup:
I'm working up an idea for the quarters, based upon something our esteemed moderator suggested some time back...
Well, fortunately for those of us not part of the nonstarter club, we don't have this issue to contend with.
Best of luck with your project. Hopefully you'll be able to provide others like yourself with a reasonable substitute for what the rest of us have had all these years.
And at least your task is still easier than trying to fit all three decks of the Jupiter 2 within it's exterior.
Yeah, it's much easier to follow the discussion while drunk if there are pictures; which is the best way to enter any thread about the TOS bridge.
I agree, except for a few minor tweaks, since the sets could expand/contract a few inches depending on the episode. Unless we count such things as the Shuttle and Hangar. And the Engineering set. And all those rooms with only three walls. I actually shrunk the bridge & alcove by a few inches each. Why? Because I felt like it.
ancient said:
Yeah, it's much easier to follow the discussion while drunk if there are pictures; which is the best way to enter any thread about the TOS bridge.
I agree, except for a few minor tweaks, since the sets could expand/contract a few inches depending on the episode. Unless we count such things as the Shuttle and Hangar. And the Engineering set. And all those rooms with only three walls. I actually shrunk the bridge & alcove by a few inches each. Why? Because I felt like it.
Big difference between tweaking the size by a few inches and putting the turbolift in a location where it clearly wasn't.
Minor update time....
Mainly just cleaning out some old turboshafts, for the sake of clarity, bulking up the transporter, and clearing out room for some med labs.
I suppose I could put the bowling alley in the ship's gymnasium (port side, right next to the big blue deuterium slush tank).
Mainly just cleaning out some old turboshafts, for the sake of clarity, bulking up the transporter, and clearing out room for some med labs.
I suppose I could put the bowling alley in the ship's gymnasium (port side, right next to the big blue deuterium slush tank).
That gray circle in the middle. Is that where the main computer will go?
