Enterprises battle bridge

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ Putting the bridge deep inside the ship isn't needed. It's not the job of the hull itself to protect the bridge; that's what SHIELDS are for.

Any attack powerful enough to punch through a ship's shields will hit the bridge no matter where it is.

 

[Mytran]

The little bullseye bubble is pretty silly, though. If you want a window on the Bridge, why not at eye level?

 

[Timo]

Because the window isn't meant to be looked through? Most of the windows in the upper level of the saucer are skylights anyway, there for purposes other than allowing the people below to view a target of interest.

In general, the bridge doesn't appear to be a target worth protecting much. A starship can fight without the bridge and the officers there - a second set of professionals will take over if the first one is knocked out of the game. Few adversaries try to aim at the bridge in any engagement, be it with intent to wound or to kill. It's one of the last things targeted by the Duras sisters in ST:GEN, say.

Significantly, the really important bits apparently cannot be protected. The warp coils must have access to the exterior through those fancy blue-glowing windows, the impulse engines need those red-hot (?) radiators (?), even the antimatter is generally stored close to the outer surface so that it can be quickly gotten rid of. It's a bit like building a heavily armored battleship in an era where gunnery is accurate, rapid and long-ranged but the only available propulsion is vulnerable paddle wheels and sails - why bother?

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Karzak]

The only thing the saucer adds to the equation is the huge phasers banks, and perhaps sensors. IIRC, everything else is in the drive section. Generators, torpedolaunchers, an impulse engine in the neck.

The saucer section has impulse engines also.

 

[Maurice]

Interview with Mr. Probert about the design of the ship , which should replace the "legends" here with something more factual.

INTERVIEW (LINK)

 

[Mytran]

Thanks for posting that - it seems to be the article I read once and had in mind upthread

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

Interview with Mr. Probert about the design of the ship , which should replace the "legends" here with something more factual.

INTERVIEW (LINK)

And another interview at Trekplace. Also, this scan of a "Star Trek" magazine interview.

He's quoted in this article on designing the bridge.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

^ None of those discuss the rationale (if any), for the layout of the TOS Enterprise, though. The layout of the TOS Ent is relevant to the discussion, because the Ent-D is highly derivative of the TOS Ent. If you want to know what the rationale is for placing the main bridge in the primary hull, you need to know what that thinking was behind the scenes for TOS, because that set the precedent that's been followed ever since.

 

[Mytran]

True, but I would like to thank Ryan Thomas Riddle for those links. This is the one which shows the multi-level "civic centre" bridge I mentioned upthread.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/--U9K7QxiECc/UnVyv3el6zI/AAAAAAAACGI/M0qhjUZ8Aus/s1600/ANDY6.jpg
I still feel it reflects best the concept of the "flying city" approach to the E-D, had they stayed with that mindset.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

^ None of those discuss the rationale (if any), for the layout of the TOS Enterprise, though. The layout of the TOS Ent is relevant to the discussion, because the Ent-D is highly derivative of the TOS Ent. If you want to know what the rationale is for placing the main bridge in the primary hull, you need to know what that thinking was behind the scenes for TOS, because that set the precedent that's been followed ever since.

IIRC, to provided a sense of scale for the ship. A point of reference for the audience.

 

[WarpFactorZ]

I can't cite anything at the moment, but the fairly well-known TOS design legend is that the nacelles (i.e., the engines) were placed as far away as possible from the main habitable area of the ship because of radiation. The idea was to minimize exposure.

The irony of the design is the nacelles end up RIGHT NEXT to the habitable section, thus eliminating the benefit of putting them on pylons "far" from the secondary hull.

Ideally, the support pylons should extend DOWN, instead of up, or back much, much further.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

True, but I would like to thank Ryan Thomas Riddle for those links. This is the one which shows the multi-level "civic centre" bridge I mentioned upthread.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/--U9K7QxiECc/UnVyv3el6zI/AAAAAAAACGI/M0qhjUZ8Aus/s1600/ANDY6.jpg
I still feel it reflects best the concept of the "flying city" approach to the E-D, had they stayed with that mindset.

No problem. For me, I've always dug this bridge concept:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-sDadIneiJdk/UnVyxEMYjgI/AAAAAAAACGY/UePo5awPUEc/s1600/ANDY9.jpg

 

[Marc]

True, but I would like to thank Ryan Thomas Riddle for those links. This is the one which shows the multi-level "civic centre" bridge I mentioned upthread.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/--U9K7QxiECc/UnVyv3el6zI/AAAAAAAACGI/M0qhjUZ8Aus/s1600/ANDY6.jpg
I still feel it reflects best the concept of the "flying city" approach to the E-D, had they stayed with that mindset.

No problem. For me, I've always dug this bridge concept:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-sDadIneiJdk/UnVyxEMYjgI/AAAAAAAACGY/UePo5awPUEc/s1600/ANDY9.jpg

I dunno - that box bit sticking out from the wishone looks like a safety hazard.

 

[Mytran]

I think that's the viewer for the conference table!

This design always looked a bit off to me, although I can't put my finger on why. However, private meetings at that take would be difficult with crewmen scurrying around in such close proximity, some even overlooking you on the upper platform!

 

[Mytran]

I can't cite anything at the moment, but the fairly well-known TOS design legend is that the nacelles (i.e., the engines) were placed as far away as possible from the main habitable area of the ship because of radiation. The idea was to minimize exposure.

The irony of the design is the nacelles end up RIGHT NEXT to the habitable section, thus eliminating the benefit of putting them on pylons "far" from the secondary hull.

Ideally, the support pylons should extend DOWN, instead of up, or back much, much further.

Yep, I thought so too

So, while it works as a visual cue to suggest POWERFUL ENGINES, later design lineage (and earlier, if you include ENT) doesn't really adhere to this philosophy.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

I think that's the viewer for the conference table!

This design always looked a bit off to me, although I can't put my finger on why. However, private meetings at that take would be difficult with crewmen scurrying around in such close proximity, some even overlooking you on the upper platform!

The table might've worked had it been like the plotting table in nuBSG, not really a conference table but one to monitor away missions and such. It give someplace for Picard to coordinate with the Away Teams.

I also like that there was a variety of seating, making the bridge feel more like a combination of mission control and observation center than just a control room. With the original concept of the Enterprise D being on a prolonged scientific mission, this bridge would've conveyed that more than the one we got on the show.

From a production standpoint, this design and the two-level design would also giving directors more places to film and different angles to shoot from.

 

[FormerLurker]

^Looking at it again (after a long time), it probably would have gotten the writers to give us more stories about exploration, and less about going back and reporting in to wherever, and getting involved in the politics of known space.

Doing that could well have made stories (if they even got told) like "Sins of the Father" an even bigger deal than they were, what with the Enterprise being called away from some distant exploration mission to go settle Worf's dispute with the Empire about his family and what happened on Khitomer.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

^Looking at it again (after a long time), it probably would have gotten the writers to give us more stories about exploration, and less about going back and reporting in to wherever, and getting involved in the politics of known space.

Doing that could well have made stories (if they even got told) like "Sins of the Father" an even bigger deal than they were, what with the Enterprise being called away from some distant exploration mission to go settle Worf's dispute with the Empire about his family and what happened on Khitomer.

I like the first two seasons a lot more because the ship was supposedly further out than any other ship. I really didn't like how the Enterprise played "ambulance-cop" for most of its run.

 

[Phantom]

I also like that there was a variety of seating, making the bridge feel more like a combination of mission control and observation center than just a control room. With the original concept of the Enterprise D being on a prolonged scientific mission, this bridge would've conveyed that more than the one we got on the show.

From a production standpoint, this design and the two-level design would also giving directors more places to film and different angles to shoot from.

It also would have been prohibitively expensive to set up and film. That's why they basically never used the upper level of Engineering and/or the 'pit' after about early S3.

As for the Bridge, I very much dislike the concept of "community center" when it comes to a ship's Command and Control compartment. It doesn't make sense either "in universe" OR in Real Life. You don't want to have to stop and waste precious time shooing all the kids and wives and such out of the way so you can get ready to fight.

 

[Timo]

Well, in terms of really hard reality, you wouldn't use a command center for fighting. That would all be on automatics, with the human (or other) leaders convening every now and then to discuss the fighting doctrine that the automation was to follow should there ever be a fight. And most fights would be over in an eyeblink, with the automation only informing the commanding officers "Oh, there was a war ten seconds ago. We won."...

Timo Saloniemi