I thought this was the Enterprise.
Donny's TOS Enterprise Interiors
- Thread starter Donny
- Start date
I thought this was the Enterprise.
So after taking a few days off from my project, I returned last night to do some preliminary tests of the flight deck/hangar deck/shuttlebay (what term should we use??) . Basically, what I discovered, as many of you already have, is that there's no perfect way to make all of it fit inside the Enterprise without sacrificing canon details here and there. Below are my initial findings:
*I should note that the flight deck is the only interior set I intend to seamlessly marry with the exterior of the Enterprise. One of my goals is to be able to have the player character on board a shuttlecraft as it approaches the exterior of the Enterprise and watch out the viewports as the shuttle enters the clamshell doors and lands on the flight deck. I may have to resort to some game-engine programming "trickery" to achieve this (much like how I described I did with the shuttlecraft), but for now I'd like to see how far I can get without resorting to tricks. "No tricks, Kirk." Yeah. We'll see about that.
--------
1) Not to start a whole "Scale of the Enterprise" debate (please, let's not do that here), but there's no way to keep the Enterprise scaled at 947 feet long without shrinking the flight deck down considerably, and my tests align with @blssdwlf's determination that 1,084 feet long is a more appropriate scale. Since my project primarily focuses on the interiors of the Enterprise, I think it's imperative to maintain screen-accurate scale for the interiors and adjust the exterior model as needed since it is itself more of a supporting piece for the interior tour.
2) My 28 foot shuttlecraft exterior/interior doesn't cause many problems...yet. It fits rather nicely into the flight deck (albeit it will require a larger turntable/elevator), but the hangar deck below it will have to have a ceiling height greater than ten feet since a 28 foot long shuttlecraft is just over ten feet tall, which is the standard ceiling height of every set I've created so far. (Ten foot tall ceilings with an additional foot in between decks also fits nicely inside the primary hull's outer saucer rim, which is measuring roughly 23 feet tall with the Enterprise exterior scaled to 1080'~1084'. I am more convinced now that the Enterprise should be properly scaled to at least 1080' since two decks at the measurements described above DO NOT fit inside the saucer of a 947' Enterprise, although this determination isn't that important to satisfy the aims of my project).
3) The windows of the observation deck surrounding the flight deck are smaller on the inside than on the outside. At this point, I'm considering adjusting the exterior windows to match the interior window size. However, I can resort to trickery here if we keep the flight deck facing sides of the windows as non-transparent emissive materials (as they were in the show) , and therefore keep the size differential in place so that it appears canonically-sized from both sides. You'd be able to look down and see the flight deck from the interior of the observation deck (as is implied in "The Conscience of the King"), but not the other way around.
--------
I'm going to do additional tests tonight regarding the actual size and shape of the flight deck (parallel cylinder? or frustrum?). There are so many factors to consider with this set! So please convey any insight you may have below. Thanks, people! I'm really fortunate to have a lot of great minds helping out with this project via this thread
*I should note that the flight deck is the only interior set I intend to seamlessly marry with the exterior of the Enterprise. One of my goals is to be able to have the player character on board a shuttlecraft as it approaches the exterior of the Enterprise and watch out the viewports as the shuttle enters the clamshell doors and lands on the flight deck. I may have to resort to some game-engine programming "trickery" to achieve this (much like how I described I did with the shuttlecraft), but for now I'd like to see how far I can get without resorting to tricks. "No tricks, Kirk." Yeah. We'll see about that.
--------
1) Not to start a whole "Scale of the Enterprise" debate (please, let's not do that here), but there's no way to keep the Enterprise scaled at 947 feet long without shrinking the flight deck down considerably, and my tests align with @blssdwlf's determination that 1,084 feet long is a more appropriate scale. Since my project primarily focuses on the interiors of the Enterprise, I think it's imperative to maintain screen-accurate scale for the interiors and adjust the exterior model as needed since it is itself more of a supporting piece for the interior tour.
2) My 28 foot shuttlecraft exterior/interior doesn't cause many problems...yet. It fits rather nicely into the flight deck (albeit it will require a larger turntable/elevator), but the hangar deck below it will have to have a ceiling height greater than ten feet since a 28 foot long shuttlecraft is just over ten feet tall, which is the standard ceiling height of every set I've created so far. (Ten foot tall ceilings with an additional foot in between decks also fits nicely inside the primary hull's outer saucer rim, which is measuring roughly 23 feet tall with the Enterprise exterior scaled to 1080'~1084'. I am more convinced now that the Enterprise should be properly scaled to at least 1080' since two decks at the measurements described above DO NOT fit inside the saucer of a 947' Enterprise, although this determination isn't that important to satisfy the aims of my project).
3) The windows of the observation deck surrounding the flight deck are smaller on the inside than on the outside. At this point, I'm considering adjusting the exterior windows to match the interior window size. However, I can resort to trickery here if we keep the flight deck facing sides of the windows as non-transparent emissive materials (as they were in the show) , and therefore keep the size differential in place so that it appears canonically-sized from both sides. You'd be able to look down and see the flight deck from the interior of the observation deck (as is implied in "The Conscience of the King"), but not the other way around.
--------
I'm going to do additional tests tonight regarding the actual size and shape of the flight deck (parallel cylinder? or frustrum?). There are so many factors to consider with this set! So please convey any insight you may have below. Thanks, people! I'm really fortunate to have a lot of great minds helping out with this project via this thread
I think you mentioned something about this earlier in this thread, but in a game back in the early 90s there was a level the when you rounded a some corners three times you were in a completely different space, but you were actually in the same space with different surroundings. Does Unreal have a feature like that where you could have a larger space in a smaller "container" and entering that space by going through a seamless portal (shuttlecraft door)?
I believe someone mentioned the TARDIS, too.
I believe someone mentioned the TARDIS, too.
Yes, I believe this is possible with the Unreal engine, but I'll have to do some research. I dunno how reliable portals are in this regard, but they'd be invaluable with a circumstance like this.
Not at all related to the mechanics of the Engine, but I did a shot for Of Gods and Men where I needed to take my existing Enterprise and put my existing bridge model inside it. The models were at different scales and didn't play especially nice together so I did it with compositing.
That's a long winded way of wondering what a "set scale" shuttle deck would look like if you saw it through the "model scale" Enterprise doors? (Same question for the shuttlecraft itself.) Would you eyes immediately scream to you that these things don't really fit? Or would it look OK? I'm kind of thinking it might work.
Of course you'd still have to make to DOORS match. Maybe.
That's a long winded way of wondering what a "set scale" shuttle deck would look like if you saw it through the "model scale" Enterprise doors? (Same question for the shuttlecraft itself.) Would you eyes immediately scream to you that these things don't really fit? Or would it look OK? I'm kind of thinking it might work.
Of course you'd still have to make to DOORS match. Maybe.
This is why I want to resort to just scaling the exterior up to match the needs of the interior instead of using portals and differing scales, etc. One would be much more likely to notice if the interior was out of "screen-accurate scale" rather than the exterior.
Okay - maybe a bit off topic (or going backwards but then...). On the flight deck elevator - you do NOT need a central hydraulic lift. If you look at what auto shops use, or what has been used (for decades) on real aircraft carriers, you will see side-lifting elevators. No need to have the decks below clogged up with that shaft...
I forget the artists name (and I'm sorry) but someone did a rather terrific FX shot of landing the shuttle in the deck, complete with personnel in the "control tower" under that bubble on the aft of the hangar.
The point is, this person had no idea how big the ship was "supposed to be". He eye-balled it to look right. That's probably the way to go.
The point is, this person had no idea how big the ship was "supposed to be". He eye-balled it to look right. That's probably the way to go.
The Starry Expanse people just had a blog post where they alluded to using "Unreal-engine wizardry" to make a duct that points in different directions at the ends appear to extend in a straight line from the inside, likely a portal. There's a comment there with a video that shows a portal performing effectively, though that's in a simple test scene, and weird things can always happen in 3D as you add more elements into the mix...
If the doorway in and out of the flight deck was a simple rectangular plane, I think a portal would work great. But in the case of the TOS flight deck, the "doorway" is a spherical clamshell opening. This presents problems. But, like I said, I'll do some research.
This seems like a good rule of thumb, especially since we never saw much on TOS to give the Enterprise a definitive scale, outside of seeing the shuttlecraft in the shuttle bay. You didn't really get a good idea of how big the Enterprise was supposed to be until the movies, when TMP and TWOK showed us a shuttle flying outside the ship and docking with it.
Last edited:
In addition, we have had inclined elevators since the Eiffel Tower (or before) so the drop need not be vertical . A rotated shuttlecraft (sitting athwart ship) might have the clearance to descend at an angle to the lower deck.
@Donny - I don't know if this might help or not, but I derived ~3'6" wide and ~3'5" tall (2'10.5" vertical) observation windows when I recreated the TCOTK room and I used the same size for the flight deck windows (that are not the control booths) and it worked out without having to fudge anything. The only thing I didn't do was place the TCOTK room to overlook directly the flight deck because it's shape (re-dress from the Romulan BOP bridge) didn't fit for me and I ended up moving it forward into the hull.
These series of beauty shots are spot on. I get teary eyed looking at it over and over and over again. There was nothing like the Enterprise.Here are some 16:10 shots featuring different angles and details:
(Disclaimer: Forgive me, as I know some of you have been studying the flight deck/hangar deck for years, and have already come to many of these realizations. Bear with me as I study and test.)
So my initial tests at a full-scale flight deck (based on Datin's measurements of the miniature set provided by Petri Blomqvist) have confirmed this fact for me: the flight deck as depicted in the few times we see it in TOS will not fit in a 947' Enterprise. I myself am a fan of a smaller Enterprise, and am aware that 947' is the more accepted canon size of the Enterprise. Also, more importantly, walking around in first person, the set is obviously huge and feels much larger than I imagined it to be, and there's an evident abundance of empty space. Even with my 28 foot shuttlecraft. I'm aware I haven't modeled mock ups of the observation decks, but I really doubt it will make the room feel any less unnecessarily empty.
So, I'm torn. The size as I have it feels right (and is dimensionally equal) in regard to how it appeared in the canon glimpses we do get of the bay. And scaling the flight deck down to a more economical size would throw off proportions to a point where it would break from what we see on-screen. But as it stands it's just huuuuuge and empty from a first person perspective. And doesn't fit inside a 947' ship. So there's that.
My decision is this: to maintain the cavernous dimensions and adhere to my creed to stick as close to screen-accurate as possible, or do as others have done and scale the flight deck down and therefore break proportions (the observation deck and the pocket archways can't be any shorter, afterall) for something that feels much less empty and a much more economical use of space and fits in with the MJ determined size of the Enterprise.
Here's a shot to convey how large it feels from the ground, using a first person field-of-view (90 degrees)
Forgive the quality of these renders
And here's a traditional shot of my mockup with a screencap of the flight deck crudely and lightly superimposed over it:
So my initial tests at a full-scale flight deck (based on Datin's measurements of the miniature set provided by Petri Blomqvist) have confirmed this fact for me: the flight deck as depicted in the few times we see it in TOS will not fit in a 947' Enterprise. I myself am a fan of a smaller Enterprise, and am aware that 947' is the more accepted canon size of the Enterprise. Also, more importantly, walking around in first person, the set is obviously huge and feels much larger than I imagined it to be, and there's an evident abundance of empty space. Even with my 28 foot shuttlecraft. I'm aware I haven't modeled mock ups of the observation decks, but I really doubt it will make the room feel any less unnecessarily empty.
So, I'm torn. The size as I have it feels right (and is dimensionally equal) in regard to how it appeared in the canon glimpses we do get of the bay. And scaling the flight deck down to a more economical size would throw off proportions to a point where it would break from what we see on-screen. But as it stands it's just huuuuuge and empty from a first person perspective. And doesn't fit inside a 947' ship. So there's that.
My decision is this: to maintain the cavernous dimensions and adhere to my creed to stick as close to screen-accurate as possible, or do as others have done and scale the flight deck down and therefore break proportions (the observation deck and the pocket archways can't be any shorter, afterall) for something that feels much less empty and a much more economical use of space and fits in with the MJ determined size of the Enterprise.
Here's a shot to convey how large it feels from the ground, using a first person field-of-view (90 degrees)
Forgive the quality of these renders
And here's a traditional shot of my mockup with a screencap of the flight deck crudely and lightly superimposed over it:
Last edited:
Thanks, @feek61. I have all those, but they're actually very helpful. I should note, if I'm not mistaken, that the last image is not of the original set, but of a fantastic CG rendition by Petri Blomqvist.I'm don't think these will help since they have little relation to the actual "real" size but here are some interesting photos of the miniature.
Last edited:
Go with what makes sense with your eyes, and stick with it. I wouldn't get too hooked on canon because a lot it is dead wrong. Heck, you're doing such a tremendous job, I'm all in on what you figured out.(Disclaimer: Forgive me, as I know some of you have been studying the flight deck/hangar deck for years, and have already come to many of these realizations. Bear with me as I study and test.)
So my initial tests at a full-scale flight deck (based on Datin's measurements of the miniature set provided by Petri Blomqvist) have confirmed this fact for me: the flight deck as depicted in the few times we see it in TOS will not fit in a 947' Enterprise. I myself am a fan of a smaller Enterprise, and am aware that 947' is the more accepted canon size of the Enterprise. Also, more importantly, walking around in first person, the set is obviously huge and feels much larger than I imagined it to be, and there's an evident abundance of empty space. Even with my 28 foot shuttlecraft. I'm aware I haven't modeled mock ups of the observation decks, but I really doubt it will make the room feel any less unnecessarily empty.
So, I'm torn. The size as I have it feels right (and is dimensionally equal) in regard to how it appeared in the canon glimpses we do get of the bay. And scaling the flight deck down to a more economical size would throw off proportions to a point where it would break from what we see on-screen. But as it stands it's just huuuuuge and empty from a first person perspective. And doesn't fit inside a 947' ship. So there's that.
My decision is this: to maintain the cavernous dimensions and adhere to my creed to stick as close to screen-accurate as possible, or do as others have done and scale the flight deck down and therefore break proportions (the observation deck and the pocket archways can't be any shorter, afterall) for something that feels much less empty and a much more economical use of space and fits in with the MJ determined size of the Enterprise.
Here's a shot to convey how large it feels from the ground, using a first person field-of-view (90 degrees)
Forgive the quality of these renders
And here's a traditional shot of my mockup with a screencap of the flight deck crudely and lightly superimposed over it:
I'm liking the feel of the space much more now that I've blocked in more of the shapes into this mock-up, which is an appropriately up-scaled version of filming miniature. It really feels like it's on-screen appearance in TOS, so this size is winning my TOS-loving heart. My plan as of now is much like I did with the shuttlecraft: get the set as screen-accurate as possible and then worry about marrying it with the exterior (however small or large is required) later, and use similar game-engine trickery to "hide the seams", so-to-speak.
I know there are some out there that prefer a smaller, more compact flight deck taking up space akin to the Phase II cutaway, but my creed to make the interiors as screen-accurate as possible is overriding any urge I have to scale down the deck and break proportions.
I am, however, going to move the conjectured forward wall of the flight deck a bit more aft than where the forward end of the miniature set terminated. This will reduce the space a bit without breaking what we see on-screen, since we never see that wall due to it not existing on the miniature set.
I know there are some out there that prefer a smaller, more compact flight deck taking up space akin to the Phase II cutaway, but my creed to make the interiors as screen-accurate as possible is overriding any urge I have to scale down the deck and break proportions.
I am, however, going to move the conjectured forward wall of the flight deck a bit more aft than where the forward end of the miniature set terminated. This will reduce the space a bit without breaking what we see on-screen, since we never see that wall due to it not existing on the miniature set.
