How Long was the Type 7 Shuttlecraft Model...?
- Thread starter WAMTNG
- Start date
Here’s the only pic I found that would determine the size of the filming model:
https://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/type7-shuttle/shuttle7-probert-study.jpg
https://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/type7-shuttle/shuttle7-probert-study.jpg
That's fantastic! Thanks so much for that. That makes it look a little bigger than two feet... what do you think?
No takers on this one...? I'm really uncertain, but my suspicion is that it is never mentioned, and we all learned what it was from the Technical Manual.
I am fairly certain that 'type 7' was never mentioned in the TOS, they just called them 'Shuttles' for short.they were also NEVER meant for range - they were ship-to-ship or ship-to-planet. This 'using them for everything' and giving them long-range warp/shield/weapon/transporter capabilities is all TNG stuff.
I recently watched a great video about the original, full-sized model, and it was built to 3/4 scale, which lead to a lot of problems. I mean, why wouldn't you just build it full-size at that point? The actors had to sit in tiny, child-sized seats! Also, because the studio was so strapped for cash, it was built (for free) by the AMT model company, and they got the rights to produce the model out of the deal.
I recently watched a great video about the original, full-sized model, and it was built to 3/4 scale, which lead to a lot of problems. I mean, why wouldn't you just build it full-size at that point? The actors had to sit in tiny, child-sized seats! Also, because the studio was so strapped for cash, it was built (for free) by the AMT model company, and they got the rights to produce the model out of the deal.
Well, it seems reasonable that the shuttles in the 24th century have more capabilities than the ones in the 23rd, doesn't it?
Hey Dukhat - I've included the image you found (thanks again!) on the WAM for "Coming of Age", which will run in October. I've included a thanks to you at the bottom of the newsletter. If you have another name you'd like to appear there other than 'Dukhat' (or a link you'd want included) just let me know. Truly appreciate the assist! The image you found is absolutely amazing!
It does. But I also think the TNG writers were more prone to feature creep than the classic Trek writers.
It does. But I also think the TNG writers were more prone to feature creep than the classic Trek writers.
I dunno, I mean TOS made a lot of stuff up as they went along. I'm not sure about technology, since I'm not a technology person and all, but a lot of the setting was made up across the episodes.
Plus I'm pretty sure long-range shuttles were introduced as early as Season 1 in TNG, when they rendezvoused with the shuttle carrying Troi near the planet were Armus lived (or were supposed to, anyways)
Of course how much sense long-range shuttles made is up for debate. If I was in the vast vacuum of Space, possibly hundreds of light years from the next space station or inhabitable planet I'd prefer to be in a large ship like the Enterprise and not in something that seemed to be the size of one of those SUV cars.
Right, but this is precisely the difference! Classic Trek is one of several 60s shows inventing the concept of a writer's bible - the setting is all being rationalised on the fly. But TNG formalises lore management like no show previously. And yet, still, 'the needs of the story outweigh the needs of the lore continuity'. And I think... at least most of the time... it's probably a good thing too!
