• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Donny's TOS Enterprise Interiors

The forum did the old 'Not gonna notify you any more' trick again, so I've just caught up on a couple of weeks of Saladin/Ptolemy goodness! I've always loved those daft FJ ships, especially the little Saladin/Hermes scouts. They seemed a logical expansion of Starfleet, and I'd say the Reliant took some inspiration from FJ's idea to rearrange parts of the Enterprise.

Got to say the hints of bridges for these ships have me intrigued! You did a great job on the Grissom bridge, with a really unique but completely believable take.
 
Not Space Cocaine™... Jewels of Sound (Copyright 1966, The Kilimanjaro Corporation).

C7kLxui.jpg
Is it just me, or does Beckwith kind of look like Lenny Montana, the actor who played Luca Brasi in The Godfather?

Luca-Brasi-3.jpg
 
I've got a rather intense project coming up at work the following few weeks, so I wanted to tie up the loose ends of both the Ptolemy-class and the Saladin-class, and take showcase screenshots tonight before I potentially get swamped.

I'll start with my take on the Ptolemy-class U.S.S. Cassini, based on the design by Franz Joseph. As stated before, I always though this lady looked funny on paper, but after fleshing her out in 3D and giving it a proper texture and lighting treatment, I rather like her very much. It was also a lot of fun bringing the standard cargo containers to life, adding details and decals to Joseph's otherwise featureless containers. Forgive the volume of pics that follows, as I wanted to provide many angles with cargo containers and without.














I wanted to keep the details of the towing pad simple and try to come up with something that Matt Jefferies would. Following Joseph's ideas of turboshafts that would connect to the ship via the dorsal, I have a simple two-turboshaft docking port just forward of center of the pad that meets a similar port on the container. In between the two turboshaft ports (yellow), I imagine that red rectangle to be the primary power hookup that also interfaces with it's counterpart on the cargo container. Flanking each side of the turboshaft port and running from bow to stern are structures with inset metal pads that slide into the notches on top of the container. I imagine these structures grip the pod via electromagnetic charge, backed up by battery in case of power failure. I know that with electromagnets I could've just used a flat tow pad that adhered to a similarly flat surface of a container, but I wanted to provide some sort of physical bond as well.



Here are some shots of the container by itself. You'll noticed that I settled on using a "TC-xxxxx" registry number (TC = Transport Container, and I've added an extra digit) instead of FJ's "NCC-xxxx", and the first number of the registry represents the class of container it is, as follows:

Mark I Containers (Liquids) start at TC-10000
Mark II Containers (Dry Bulk) start at TC-20000
Mark III Containers (Refrigerated Goods) start at TC-30000
Mark IV Containers (People) start at TC-40000
and Mark V Containers (Products) start at TC-50000




I imagine that the containers could be set up to attach to each other so that the Ptolemy could carry up to 4 at a time. Again, I wanted to feature some sort of physical bond. I imagine rods that are stored within the walls of the contianer that slide aft to meet the next pod, where they are securely fastened in some automatic fashion once received.


@Bill Thompson, rest assured that my next task is to create the Starliner pod, as promised.
 
Last edited:
Beautiful stuff!
I usually don't care much about the TOS aesthetic (I know, I'm a heretic and all that), but with these models you did the impossible. Not only all of these ships look amazing and real now, but you even made me like the pilot Enterprise! What magic is this?
Space Magic!

I appreciate the kind words, @Rekkert! I have to admit I'm surprised how they're turning out, especially since I'll admit I always thought the FJ designs were a bit ugly. But I think I'm hitting the sweet spot with lighting and texturing that's giving them that extra push towards realism.

Needless to say, I'm having a lot of fun with these projects, and they're easy enough right now that I'm not hitting burn-out like I was with those projects I was taking on that took a month or two to complete. Just what I needed!

The forum did the old 'Not gonna notify you any more' trick again, so I've just caught up on a couple of weeks of Saladin/Ptolemy goodness! I've always loved those daft FJ ships, especially the little Saladin/Hermes scouts. They seemed a logical expansion of Starfleet, and I'd say the Reliant took some inspiration from FJ's idea to rearrange parts of the Enterprise.

Got to say the hints of bridges for these ships have me intrigued! You did a great job on the Grissom bridge, with a really unique but completely believable take.
Welcome back, @Tomalak! I haven't forgotten about the Hermes, btw. I think I'm going to model it with the Pilot details/colors to differentiate it from the Saladin.

And yes, the bridge variants for these classes will be quick, fun work. I don't want to do anything extravagant for them, just color variations and perhaps a low-hanging ceiling structure to make them feel more claustrophobic. For the Federation-class Dreadnought, however, I plan on opening up the bridge a bit more, with double turbolift alcoves and an observation/conference lounge to the rear. We'll see how that goes!
 
Love all the shots. I'm imagining the helmsman of the cargo hauler know complaining like the truckers do at my job when they have to run their truck bob-tail. Semi's are designed to have something behind them to keep them easier to manage on the road and even an empty trailer is preferable to having nothing, so I can only imagine the helmsman bitching up a storm when they'd have to pilot the ship without any cargo. ;)

And I absolutely love the look of the containers. It's a very nice touch.
 
Many of these images are similar to the ones I took of the Xerxes a week ago, but I wanted to add my standard labels on these images now that I'm calling my Saladin-class model "done":

Of all the FJ designs that were his originals, I just like the Ptolemy the best. She just seems more balanced, and I've always thought single nacelle starships looked funny/odd, and looked like they were missing a nacelle. :)
 
The Ptolemy is great, I love the Starliner container especially.

The Grissom and later the Curry/Shelley felt to me to be calling back to that idea too. You could easily imagine the Grissom with differently cargo containers instead of the mission pod she has in Star Trek III.

I don't quite buy that it's an engineering section, it's easier to see the whole primary hull as a self-contained ship.
 
Last edited:
This is truly gorgeous work. The little bits of added detail are lovely. It's always a pleasure when people add detail that ends up looking like it just should have been there all along. (The flip side is when details feel needlessly bolted on, which this isn't.)

Looking forward to more when you get time again.
This is Dreadnought Entente Calling. NCC-2120. Calling comm station Epsilon IX. Come in.
:beer:
 
Beautifully done!

That said I hate FJ's designs. They really just feel cobbled together, especially the Tug, with the nacelle pylons just stuck into the saucer bottom. It's just...lazy and unconvincing. It honestly feels like he just cut and pasted a few components together and drew a handful of lines to cover the splices.
 
...with the nacelle pylons just stuck into the saucer bottom....
Ya know, I kinda took issue with the pylons just being "stuck to the saucer bottom" at first and considered creating some more elegant way to attach them, but then I remembered that the pylons of the Enterprise were just "stuck to the secondary hull", so I took less issue with that fact. If it was good enough for Jefferies and his design, why wouldn't it be good enough for FJ?

And I had this drive to just model the designs as they are without trying to "fix" them too much, mostly in a fulfillment of childhood nostalgia and to see those designs fleshed out with the true "filming model" details, colors, etc.
 
At least they're stuck into the general vicinity of the impulse engines, which is as good a place as any for a dilithium reactor.
 
The designs are certainly not lazy or unconvincing if you take Jefferies at his word. He literally called the nacelles “quick change units”. The Enterprise is made up of a “primary” and “secondary” hull - it couldn’t be more literally modular.

When you add in the fact that Franz Joseph consulted with Jefferies on Roddenberry’s Genesis II production, it’s clear he had the benefit of discussing what he was doing with Jefferies himself. He understood what Jefferies intended. Indeed, Jefferies himself sketched a design with the Enterprise saucer and two nacelles “stuck” on top.

http://www.trekcore.com/specials/albums/sketches/STTOS_Sketch_EnterpriseConcept10.jpg

The fact Roddenberry etc soured on Franz Joseph’s success has colored contemporary opinions of the fidelity - and quality - of his work.
 
Last edited:
It IS lazy. It doesn't look designed. It looks cobbled together from existing bits—which is what it is. YMMV but I find all of his ship designs bland and uninspired.
 
I've always had a weakness for the Ptolemy class in the Technical Manual, especially once I purchased a set of Lou Zocchi's Game Science starship miniatures at a con in the early 80s. I think the variety and practicality of the cargo containers (and starliner!) really appealed to my imagination. You've done a beautiful job bringing them to life, Donny! They look like real, physical objects; workhorses for Starfleet.
 
It IS lazy. It doesn't look designed. It looks cobbled together from existing bits—which is what it is. YMMV but I find all of his ship designs bland and uninspired.

If you keep the parts unchanged, on the assumption they are modules and meant to be interchangeable, how many arrangements of cylinders and saucers can YOU come up with? If the starting assumption is this modularity, it kind of limits how much you can mess with the parts, doesn’t it? Assuming that is what Jefferies said - that it is a modular design - I don’t get how you or anyone else can call it lazy. It is following a design prerequisite and pursuing it to the number of combinations it would sensibly allow.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top