Interesting. What's going on with the pennant lines? There are 2 distinct "steps" on the bottom most picture.
Engine Room(s) on the TOS Enterprise (revisited)
- Thread starter Henoch
- Start date
The construction clearly shows effort was made to create a straight row of windows that was above the red banner lines to make the model look nice. The model has sloping alignment of windows in the rear, the Sinclair drawing below has sloping windows in the rear... Some groups of windows were lined up to be straight and horizontal, while other windows, mostly in the rear half, were lined up on the barrel slats. Example for one row of windows shows a taper angle of about 1.9 degrees:
Just for fun, I'd just like to see the secondary hull re-proportioned to line up the windows and stretch the hangar area back to look more like the pressure hull diagrams so the Datin Hangar Model fits inside the ship. Alas, I don't have the computer tools.
^^How do we know it's not the front section that needs to be tapered down? 
Anyways, we do know from "Where No Man Has Gone Before" that there is at least one long deck that is staggered higher than another deck so having the windows all in alignment isn't necessary. But I'm sure someone will play with your re-proportioning idea.
Anyways, we do know from "Where No Man Has Gone Before" that there is at least one long deck that is staggered higher than another deck so having the windows all in alignment isn't necessary. But I'm sure someone will play with your re-proportioning idea.
On his drawings perhaps, but not on Casimiro's or Kerr's.The construction clearly shows effort was made to create a straight row of windows that was above the red banner lines to make the model look nice. The model has sloping alignment of windows in the rear, the Sinclair drawing below has sloping windows in the rear... Some groups of windows were lined up to be straight and horizontal, while other windows, mostly in the rear half, were lined up on the barrel slats. Example for one row of windows shows a taper angle of about 1.9 degrees:
Just for fun, I'd just like to see the secondary hull re-proportioned to line up the windows and stretch the hangar area back to look more like the pressure hull diagrams so the Datin Hangar Model fits inside the ship. Alas, I don't have the computer tools.
I tried it using my limited skill. I took the pressure hull diagram, sized it for a 122 foot length from the fantail to the aft of the pylon; sized and superimposed the Sinclair model over the front portion; and lastly, eyeballed the rest. The new clamshell doors are 60' in diameter. The stern got so long, that I shortened it (see below). Rear windows line up, now. Conclusion: Meh (but the hangar sorta fits...)
I noticed that the hangar sketch (side view below) matches the profile of the pressure hull sketch with the exposed clamshell doors, no overhang and the rear dome in front of the doors. The rear overhang didn't exist early on. Later, it looks like the clamshell doors and fantail were pulled forward under the dome ~10'. Odd, the hangar sketch must have been done pre-33" and 11' ship model design since both ship models had the overhang.
Sorry guys, nursing a back injury so I'm going to be briefer than I would like.
Mea culpa. Didn't mean to imply ALL the windows were ON the seams. And the one row of level windows does not validate the point that ALL the windows in the front half of the hull are not tapered, which is the claim I was responding to.
I noticed that too: If I were to hazard a guess, the image is a video grab because you can see those "steps" running vertical, passing through seams and a window
I would have kept the original size of the nacelle pylons but otherwise an interesting shape. The profile is reminiscent of FJ's Dreadnought hull. Your version would be a weird shape to model near the stern.I tried it using my limited skill. I took the pressure hull diagram, sized it for a 122 foot length from the fantail to the aft of the pylon; sized and superimposed the Sinclair model over the front portion; and lastly, eyeballed the rest. The new clamshell doors are 60' in diameter. The stern got so long, that I shortened it (see below). Rear windows line up, now. Conclusion: Meh (but the hangar sorta fits...)
Please take care, BK. You only get one spine in your life. I know; four back operations on the bottom two discs including a fusion last year. Get well, soon.
I thought the same thing. Plus, it gives back hangar bay length I removed by moving the doors forward. The rear windows still need to be repositioned forward to locate them on the observation deck, if I continue any further.
The TAS "E", as seen from the outside in profile, had a longer Shuttlecraft Bay as well. Perhaps the Shuttlecraft Bay is a modular pressure compartment area that can be refitted to starships from time to time for mission specifics or what not, such as to allow accommodation of larger shuttles? If you take the longer Shuttlecraft Bay and "push it back" so that the front bulkhead is behind the trailing edge of the pylons, then you get the approximate length we see in the pressure compartment diagram and the the TAS "E".
"Un-tapering the Hull"; last view; put all the windows and pylon on their original X-axis. Re-tapered the back bone to give more slant and extended the underside scallop to start at its original position. Almost all of the X-axis stretch is between the last window and the top dome, but the stern was blown up to get the 60' dia. doors. For the Y-axis stretch, I mostly just matched up to the stern points and rotated up the rear windows to be inline with the front sets of windows. Onto the log fire.
Me, too, but I just got to move those last two windows...
Thanks. Just musculature not anything spinal but I'm not been able to sit very long in my computer chair.Please take care, BK. You only get one spine in your life. I know; four back operations on the bottom two discs including a fusion last year. Get well, soon.
FWIW, Trekcore.com has a great shot of those windows if anyone is still interested. (That whole album is worth a look.)
http://tos.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/smithsonian-model/ent_smithsonian_40.jpg
For some reason I wasn't alerted to new messages on this thread last week, and I missed some excellent exchanges!
The edge of the set peeking in was a great find. Most of the time the set builders fitted extra panels in whenever the ceiling would appear in shot, so this must have been a pure accident on the day of shooting!
Notice that (unlike The Paradise Syndrome) the mere fact of out-of-control warp speeds has no effect on the tube structure behind the grill. This really adds credence to the notion that the tubes are connected to energy conversion for onboard systems like shields, deflectors and phasers (which were no doubt being charged up as they approached the asteroid at Warp 9)
So, for some reason JML really saw the Enterprise's engineering setup at having single, central reactor! Is there some reason that he followed the "naval" model instead of the "aviation" model of energy generation?
Regardless, this means that there are references to secondary hull reactor systems as far back as early Season Two.
The edge of the set peeking in was a great find. Most of the time the set builders fitted extra panels in whenever the ceiling would appear in shot, so this must have been a pure accident on the day of shooting!
This got me thinking (eventually), because it's not the only episode that JML wrote, is it? And if I could backtrack to a couple of topics ago, I found another potential reference to the main M/AM reactor systems being in the secondary hull. From The Changeling:
I have emphasised the relevant text. Nomad opening the antimatter input valve and giving free reign to the energy release is almost exactly what happens in That Which Survives and the ever increasing warp speed is the exact same consequence. Fortunately, this time Nomad can reverse the effect.
Notice that (unlike The Paradise Syndrome) the mere fact of out-of-control warp speeds has no effect on the tube structure behind the grill. This really adds credence to the notion that the tubes are connected to energy conversion for onboard systems like shields, deflectors and phasers (which were no doubt being charged up as they approached the asteroid at Warp 9)
So, for some reason JML really saw the Enterprise's engineering setup at having single, central reactor! Is there some reason that he followed the "naval" model instead of the "aviation" model of energy generation?
Regardless, this means that there are references to secondary hull reactor systems as far back as early Season Two.
Last edited:
@ Mytran; I was aware of the single reactor reference in "The Changeling", but for some reason did not think to check if JML was involved, but, of course, it comes as no surprise that he was. So basically it's the JML engine model vs the GR/MJ model we're dealing with, and whether they could,or should, be reconciled.
I think the takeaway from this find is that The Changeling is from Season 2 and properly vetted through the Roddenberry/Jefferies script review. And if the sequence of events is as I believe, the James Blish versions have some input on this. Blish has Scotty call Kirk when Nomad starts messing with things while the episode has Scotty have an engineering tech call Kirk while he keeps and eye on Nomad. That dialog is not in Blish's adaption of the story. As Blish's adaptions are often of an earlier version of the script and not the shooting verision of the script (showing earlier names and edited scenes), it is possible that the dialog in question came from other writers on staff or Roddenberry himself. In season 3 we really can't be that sure of the process, but in Seasons 1 & 2 we do know that no script was shot without being reworked, often by Roddenberry himself. Now if we have such a early copy of this script, it would be interesting to see if the difference is a Blish edit or a script edit. Without having an early version of the script I think we can assume that this description either passed unchanged through the editing process or was added in the editing process. It is not something that just slipped through in season 3 as previously suggested.
Have we ever detailed out the two different engine/power models?
JML Model (naval style)
1. One M/AM reactor in secondary (or saucer) hull feeding power to the warp engines in each nacelle.
2. etc.
GR/MJ Model (aviation style)
1. Two M/AM reactors, one in each warp engine nacelle which send power into the secondary hull.
2. etc.
or is that about it? Three or more M/AM reactors? Magic rocks? Anti-matter flow?
I love treknobabble. 
In TOS, it seems likely that the setup in the secondary hull consists of 3 distinct reactors to comply with such episodes as Catspaw or Day Of The Dove (unless the other 2 reactors are in the nacelles for some reason) combined into a single "reactor system". There remains a single antimatter input valve which feeds all 3 (and is the obvious target of sabotage!)
Except that even muti-engine aviation style still should have a single fuel input as a plane has to manage the flow of fuel out of the tanks to keep the plane balanced. What we are talking about is the fuel input. It is a two part fuel mixture and the only time the specifics are detailed, it is a single system. And there could be three reactors and one fuel feed system. The only ship we get a crystal clear picture of the entire reaction system is Ent D in TNG and that could be greatly different than 100 years before that. I suggested before that the main reactor could pre-charge the antimatter by mixing in a smaller amount of matter to create an anti-mater plasma the then goes to the warp engines where the reaction completes with the matter stored there (and suddenly the Bussards make a lot of sense, acting like the air intake on an internal cumbustion engine). The first reaction provides the ship power, the other the warp field. So a three reactor system with a single anti-matter fuel input fits all the situations.Have we ever detailed out the two different engine/power models?
JML Model (naval style)
1. One M/AM reactor in secondary (or saucer) hull feeding power to the warp engines in each nacelle.
2. etc.
GR/MJ Model (aviation style)
1. Two M/AM reactors, one in each warp engine nacelle which send power into the secondary hull.
2. etc.
or is that about it? Three or more M/AM reactors? Magic rocks? Anti-matter flow?
