Donny's TOS Enterprise Interiors

[David cgc]

There's another aspect to the FJ designs that was raised in Trek Tech about a year ago (though I felt like I read it last month, because the years begin coming, and do not cease from coming) that the Star Fleet Technical Manual was as much a guide to crafting and fan-art as it was a work of technically-oriented science fiction, so the fact that the unseen ships of Starfleet could be easily built out of the pieces of an Enterprise model kit had a practical element to it, as well as a philosophical one.

As far as the ship designs go, let's remember that FJ's Tech Manual was supposed to be somewhat "interactive". That's why the uniform patterns were in there, so fans who are into that (like his daughter) could make their own uniforms, and the communicator circuitry was a real walkie-talkie schematic for those into electronics, and so, likewise the ships were mostly easy kit bashes of the AMT model for the same reason.

 

[Maurice]

Don't even start with the "you do better" argument.

Everything you're saying is presumes an intended modularity, especially with the tug. I'd buy it more of the engine pylons joined the dorsal, since it's clearly a load-bearing structure and would fit with the Scout/Destroyer and even perhaps with the Enterprise since there must be some major power conduits in that dorsal.

 

[aridas sofia]

I didn’t say “you do better”. I wouldn’t do that. I asked how many arrangements of those parts you could come up with. There are other configurations besides those FJ drew. If you think he was being lazy by not being exhaustive, I’d have to concede at least the latter point. And I’ll also concede your point about the dorsal. That makes sense. But remember- Jefferies always had the nacelles slapped on the saucer in those early saucer sketches. The top. The bottom. Not even a pylon. So what may make sense to us may not be what he was thinking.

As for modularity, I’m working with what Jefferies said - about quick change nacelles and about the saucer and secondary hull being largely unchanged in a refitting. That, and the sketch of an Enterprise saucer with nacelles attached to its top being pulled by a smaller vessel, strongly infers - at least to me - modularity. Add to this the fact Franz Joseph actually conversed with Jefferies and thus had the opportunity to ask, and I am left with that conclusion. Sure- Jefferies tweaked the modules to fit the design, but then again, so did Franz Joseph. His dreadnought saucer and secondary hull are different from that on Enterprise.

I don’t know how old you are, but if you were around when that Tech Manual came out, you know how limited the latitude of any artist extrapolating upon Star Trek was. Fans just wouldn’t accept anything that departed very far from the established design vocabulary. TAS’ grain ships and survey vessel are possible exceptions (though I knew plenty of people who didn’t like those designs). But there is no evidence Jefferies had anything to do with any of that. Whatever was going on there can’t be said to be reflective of his thinking on the subject. There IS however, evidence he and Franz Joseph talked.

 

[BK613]

"Quick change unit" does not imply modularity. It simple means that aircraft are designed so that their engines are easy to swap out. The reason is so that the aircraft can be quickly returned to service and not be rendered unavailable by an engine that needs maintenance or repair.
Here is a modern example of a Boeing 777 undergoing a six-hour engine swap out. (Youtube video 4:44)

I also agree with Maurice. FJ's designs are boring and uninspired.

 

[aridas sofia]

Not to belabor this aside any further, but rather to tread water waiting for more of Donny’s beautiful works, however “aircraft are designed so that their engines are easy to swap out” is the very definition of modularity. ”Modular: designed with standardized units or dimensions, as for easy assembly and repair or flexible arrangement and use.”

You may think they are boring. But every design that every spacefaring or aircraft-building nation had or were planning during the 1960s were a mix of modular parts. That’s just the way it was done. And as even you have pointed out, is done.

 

[Donny]

As much as I appreciate healthy debate, the bottom line is this: whether or not the FJ designs are good or great or lazy or bad or silly or poorly engineered, these are all opinions. And I've heard all of these opinions, and more, from this thread and my posts on social media upon posting my latest batch of images. I knew going into these projects that there was going to be some people that just don't like the designs and were going to voice that, and that's okay.

I wasn't in love with the designs when I first saw them, and I agree that there are many "problems" with them from an engineering standpoint (deflector blocking the nacelle caps, nacelles not having line-of-sight, etc). But they've grown on me over the years, and I've come to view them as a valid part of my own personal Star Trek experience. So, poorly designed or not, I decided I wanted to pay them the attention I've given the other passion projects I've taken on, and sort of pay tribute to the FJ Tech Manual and the Deck Plans, both of which I've bought more than one copy of over the years (my original Tech Manual is falling apart). There was a part of me that was compelled not to deviate from the basic designs, despite their obvious engineering flaws. So, with a few exceptions here and there, I stuck to what was on paper. @Maurice calling them lazy and uninspired designs is fine...that's his opinion. One that I can't help but agree with somewhat. But I also agree with @aridas sofia's valid points about what was going on in the head of the artist who created them. The fact is that Franz did what model-makers (in film, tv, and video games) have done for decades: he kit-bashed. I have to do it all the time as a ship artist on STO. We don't have the time and resources to concept and design a new ship? Then take a few pieces of old ships and meld them together in the best way you can to create a new ship. Or, as @aridas sofia hypothesized, he didn't want to alienate fans by deviating too far from what is established by the Enterprise, so he kit-bashed new ships out of the existing canon pieces to keep fans happy and accepting of his vision.

I have mixed feelings on the designs, but in the end they were a lot of fun to model.

And, if I may say so, when fully-textured and well lit, they look freaking great.

But that's just my opinion

 

[cardinal biggles]

I guess the issue is trying to figure out whether Jefferies meant the first part — "as for easy assembly or repair" — or both that and the second part ("flexible arrangement and use"). One suggests that yes, you can stop at a starbase and they can switch out the warp nacelles in a few weeks/days/hours. The other suggests that you take a base piece (i.e., the saucer) and slap parts on it like a Mr. Potato Head.

 

[BK613]

Not to belabor this aside any further, but rather to tread water waiting for more of Donny’s beautiful works, however “aircraft are designed so that their engines are easy to swap out” is the very definition of modularity. ”Modular: designed with standardized units or dimensions, as for easy assembly and repair or flexible arrangement and use.”
.

Your confusing "interchangeable" with "modular." Modular by it's very definition means "made of several parts (modules) that can be put together in different ways (source)" That is not the same thing as easily replacing a part, even if that part is as complex as an aircraft engine. IOW, LEGOs are modular. A sectional couch is modular. An aircraft engine is not.

This is what MJ says he was thinking:
" My thinking was, because of the ship's speed there had to be terrifically powerful engines. They might be dangerous to be aroun[d], so maybe we'd better put them out of the way somewhere, which would also make them what in aviation circles we call the QCU - quick change units - where you could easily take one off and put another on." from the Feb 2000 issue of ST: The Magazine (found online here)


--------------------------------------
Edit to add: @Donny My dislike of FJ's designs in no way diminishes my appreciation of your realizations of the designs.

 

[captainkirk]

My issue with the FJ designs is that every fan-designed TOS-era ship is now just rearranged Connie parts, while the fan-designed TNG-era ships are much more unique. That said, these renders are the best versions of these ships I've ever seen.

 

[Donny]

Edit to add: @Donny My dislike of FJ's designs in no way diminishes my appreciation of your realizations of the designs.

Oh, I in no way take dislike of the designs as a knock on my work. No worries there!

 

[A Chimpanzee & 2 Trainees]

This is what MJ says he was thinking:
" My thinking was, because of the ship's speed there had to be terrifically powerful engines. They might be dangerous to be aroun[d], so maybe we'd better put them out of the way somewhere, which would also make them what in aviation circles we call the QCU - quick change units - where you could easily take one off and put another on." from the Feb 2000 issue of ST: The Magazine (found online here)

So along those lines, why then would the cargo ship place its payload between these engine nacelles if they're dangerous to be around? Obviously people could be moving to the cargo area since there's a pair of turbolifts to them. Even if you say that people can only go down there when not traveling at warp, why not instead keep the Connie arrangement and reshape the bottom half of the secondary hull to use this generic connection port for any number of attachment pods.

That way, the same ship could be used for cargo and people (troop/colonist transport?) or food or other sensitive biologic payloads.

 

[Norsehound]

My issue with the FJ designs is that every fan-designed TOS-era ship is now just rearranged Connie parts, while the fan-designed TNG-era ships are much more unique. That said, these renders are the best versions of these ships I've ever seen.

Not necessarily, the literal FJ dreadnought has a new saucer and secondary hull. And Technically the Saladin's nacelle rotated the inter coolers to the bottom (same with the FJ dread). About the only thing similar on the FJ dread is the nacelles.

I still would like to see some subtle changes on kitbashes like these. I know I had fun with that on some of the TOS ships I did, mostly because I didn't want to be so precise on recreating the ones off the Enterprise.

 

[aridas sofia]

When I was working out the evolution of these starships, one thing I postulated was that back in the Horizon/Archon day, the ball-hull ships had a secondary hull that was made up of a transport pod. The ship was a Earth-Romulan warship adapted for extended range by adding that transport pod.

https://i112.photobucket.com/albums/n167/aridas_sofia/trek/FJTMArchon_zpsfjn4snxk.jpg~original

I look at the Enterprise secondary hull as just that- a skinned over transport pod that has been refined for improved - dare I say it - warp dynamics.

From there the only question is, can you put a pod between the nacelles? Matt Jefferies didn’t say - though Aurora is certainly between the nacelles.

In the end, the way Donny has modeled these ships gives them the added verisimilitude needed to bring them up to modern tastes. They feel... real. That’s really all that matters to me. I am only debating Franz Joseph and Matt Jefferies to help clarify the validity of the approach he has taken.

 

[captainkirk]

Not necessarily, the literal FJ dreadnought has a new saucer and secondary hull. And Technically the Saladin's nacelle rotated the inter coolers to the bottom (same with the FJ dread). About the only thing similar on the FJ dread is the nacelles.

Sure, there are a lot of subtle changes to make the designs work better, but the majority of TOS-era designs I see are all just kitbashes of the Constitution.

 

[Maurice]

Just "What If..."ing here.

Were I to sit down and make up some new ships based solely on what we saw in TOS I would have started by looking at those sketched in TMOST and kept in mind that Jefferies was an aviation guy and taken my inspiration from aircraft variations. A Boeing 707 and a 747 have a lot of common elements, but while they share a generally similar shape the size and particulars of the components differ. I could see a scout with a nacelle that was shorter or fatter or leaner (like the shuttlecraft's) that are clearly similar to those on the Enterprise but not exactly the same. One thing I myself toyed with doing in my youth was a saucer with two dorsals, one above and one below (sorta Kelvin-like), going to two stubbier nacelles. Any of those sorts of things to me would have felt less cut and paste. YMMV.

If you enjoy FJ's designs, great. My opinion is already on record.

 

[Norsehound]

Sure, there are a lot of subtle changes to make the designs work better, but the majority of TOS-era designs I see are all just kitbashes of the Constitution.

I wonder if it has anything to do with mainstream trek dodging the TOS era.... pretty much up until Remastered. The Medusan transport is the newest TOS ship officially, isn't it? I'm not sure if Discovery counts. Even then though, look at Discovery. When the Enterprise is shown, it got redesigned so it doesn't match it's 60s counterpart in styling!

Wonder what it would take to get another shot set in the TOS period. Give those ships Donnie's treatment and use them- I think they'd look good for television IMO.

 

[GNDN18]

And, if I may say so, when fully-textured and well lit, they look freaking great.

 

[StarCruiser]

I wonder if it has anything to do with mainstream trek dodging the TOS era.... pretty much up until Remastered. The Medusan transport is the newest TOS ship officially, isn't it? I'm not sure if Discovery counts. Even then though, look at Discovery. When the Enterprise is shown, it got redesigned so it doesn't match it's 60s counterpart in styling!

Wonder what it would take to get another shot set in the TOS period. Give those ships Donnie's treatment and use them- I think they'd look good for television IMO.

What do you think most of the Kelvinverse ships look like? Kitbashes of the Kelvin - save the Enterprise herself - and then the redonkulously huge Dreadnought in "Into Darkness"...

 

[aridas sofia]

Just "What If..."ing here.

Were I to sit down and make up some new ships based solely on what we saw in TOS I would have started by looking at those sketched in TMOST and kept in mind that Jefferies was an aviation guy and taken my inspiration from aircraft variations. A Boeing 707 and a 747 have a lot of common elements, but while they share a generally similar shape the size and particulars of the components differ. I could see a scout with a nacelle that was shorter or fatter or leaner (like the shuttlecraft's) that are clearly similar to those on the Enterprise but not exactly the same. One thing I myself toyed with doing in my youth was a saucer with two dorsals, one above and one below (sorta Kelvin-like), going to two stubbier nacelles. Any of those sorts of things to me would have felt less cut and paste. YMMV.

If you enjoy FJ's designs, great. My opinion is already on record.

I agree with this. From the perspective of what ships a fleet or task grouping might need, there are other types than a big capital ship, a destroyer, and a transport. Not only different types, but different masses within types- light and medium cruisers, for example. When I sat down to portray the ships gathered near Organia, or those at Starbase 11, I departed widely from the simple saucer and nacelles paradigm. Building on David Shaw’s work from years ago, where he examined the “Hull Pressure Compartments” diagram on the bridge, I derived smaller subassemblies within the big hulls that could make up smaller saucers and nacelles. But the idea was the same- modularity. Component parts. Like a rocket with a defective first stage or command module that can be swapped out.

 

[Tallguy]

I'll throw in my usual refrain: Going from the ships we saw in TOS and more importantly TAS, the unifying design language of those ships were nacelles. Then FJ came along (and The Wrath of Khan solidified it) and it was all saucers saucers saucers.