Is the bridge at a funny angle?

[blssdwlf]

Not quite. The observation decks are partially cantilevered out past the flight deck's inner walls. The clearance between the outer and inner hull looks to be about half the width of the observation galleries.

Yeah, I think referencing the observation deck left too much room for interpretation as the illustration doesn't really match what was filmed.

However, the alcoves below would be subject to less interpretation as it is almost vertical with the inner wall and outer hull.

So to update, you'd have a minimum clearance of the width of the alcoves and the ceiling of the observation decks overlooking the flight deck (whichever is greater).

 

[Henoch]

Another question: does anyone think the inside side walls of the hangar tapper taper or change angle from the outside hull. It's hard to tell in the model photo due to the lens effects, but it looks like a slight bend around the aft alcove. Same with the observation deck, does it stay parallel to the inter hull or does it tapper taper in as we go forward?

<edit. taper>

 

[Mytran]

Another question: does anyone think the inside side walls of the hangar tapper or change angle from the outside hull. It's hard to tell in the model photo due to the lens effects, but it looks like a slight bend around the aft alcove. Same with the observation deck, does it stay parallel to the inter hull or does it tapper in as we go forward?

I'm not entirely clear what you're suggesting - is there a particular picture which highlights the issue especially?

 

[Maurice]

Taper.

Tapper is an arcade game where you serve beer/root beer.

 

[CultOfByron]

Found on twitter.

“My favourite Star Trek fact is that because the Enterprise bridge has its turbolift to the SIDE, but that turbolift is directly BEHIND the bridge on exterior of the ship, the bridge crew are canonically sitting at a 36 degree angle from the direction they're actually heading.”

https://twitter.com/ryanqnorth/status/1339324053803319296?s=21

I'm replying to the first posts of this thread so apologies if I repeat anything. I imagine that it was a feature of the April, Pike and Kirk era for the vanity shots, but Decker and Spock didn't care about that sort of thing so it was fixed for the refit and it stuck for all the later incarnations. But April, Pike and Kirk were fine with a wonky bridge, it's not like they had windows on it or anything...

 

[BK613]

I'm not entirely clear what you're suggesting - is there a particular picture which highlights the issue especially?

I think @Henoch is asking if the hangar miniature/model was built with the hangar side walls tapering to parallel the secondary hull shape or is the taper less than that (or even non-existent.) IOW, are we actually seeing a taper in the photos or have we been unduly influenced by TMOST diagram?

 

[Mytran]

I'm replying to the first posts of this thread so apologies if I repeat anything. I imagine that it was a feature of the April, Pike and Kirk era for the vanity shots, but Decker and Spock didn't care about that sort of thing so it was fixed for the refit and it stuck for all the later incarnations. But April, Pike and Kirk were fine with a wonky bridge, it's not like they had windows on it or anything...

The windows thing is not as important as the direction of the forces felt by the crew as they sped up, turned sharply to port etc, which would be rather discombobulating if the Bridge appeared to face forward but didn't.

I like the "vanity" explanation for the TOS-E but the TMP refit didn't do away with that setup, but embraced it! After all, now the captain can admired from both sides at once, depending on which crew use which turbolift

I think @Henoch is asking if the hangar miniature/model was built with the hangar side walls tapering to parallel the secondary hull shape or is the taper less than that (or even non-existent.) IOW, are we actually seeing a taper in the photos or have we been unduly influenced by TMOST diagram?

There's definitely a taper because the set dimensions which Datin provided describe a slightly conical shape.

 

[CultOfByron]

The windows thing is not as important as the direction of the forces felt by the crew as they sped up, turned sharply to port etc, which would be rather discombobulating if the Bridge appeared to face forward but didn't.

I like the "vanity" explanation for the TOS-E but the TMP refit didn't do away with that setup, but embraced it! After all, now the captain can admired from both sides at once, depending on which crew use which turbolift

There's definitely a taper because the set dimensions which Datin provided describe a slightly conical shape.

Aha, I didn't think of that, there's a nice shot from the starboard(?) turbolift in TWOK where they're all business as Admiral Kirk comes on board and the port(?) one when Saavik joins them to beam to Regula 1 - just two that come to mind.

Also, the inertial dampeners must have been tweaked with the directionality of the bridge, surely...

 

[Mytran]

Also, the inertial dampeners must have been tweaked with the directionality of the bridge, surely...

Ah, if only the inertial dampeners were so reliable!
Sadly, the frequency at which our heroes get tossed around the Bridge suggest otherwise...

 

[BK613]

There's definitely a taper because the set dimensions which Datin provided describe a slightly conical shape

.

Just speculating but that shape is also what you would get if Datin's dimensions applied to the inside size of the openings at each end. Which, given the extra plywood we see in that behind-the-scenes shot with the E in the foreground, might actually be the case. IOW, the tops of the skinny triangles in the above image would represent the wooden arch on the door end, the top side of the trapezoid that smaller opening of that arch, the bottom side of the trapezoid the larger opening at the forward end of the model, and the right and left sides of the white rectangle the walls of the hangar..

Edit to add. Examining some of the other images of the model, I agree there is a taper but perhaps not as extreme as the TMOST diagram or hull. Pity, because the doors determine the size of vessel that could enter and therefore I have always considered the tapered hangar a waste of space.

 

[blssdwlf]

Another question: does anyone think the inside side walls of the hangar tapper or change angle from the outside hull. It's hard to tell in the model photo due to the lens effects, but it looks like a slight bend around the aft alcove. Same with the observation deck, does it stay parallel to the inter hull or does it tapper in as we go forward?

You are correct in that the darker wall section closest to the doors around the aft alcove has a different taper angle than the rest of the inside walls. For the most part, the inside walls on average appear to stay parallel to the outer hull. The observation deck also tapers with the inside hull (laterally - vertically they remain the same height from fore to aft).

 

[Tallguy]

I'm assuming this was mentioned but maybe not: My understanding is that the hangar miniature was a forced perspective. You can see it in Jefferies' drawings because the observation deck structures taper down.

 

[Maurice]

I'm assuming this was mentioned but maybe not: My understanding is that the hangar miniature was a forced perspective. You can see it in Jefferies' drawings because the observation deck structures taper down.

Pretty sure Datin said he didn't build it that way, presumably because it would be more difficult to construct in forced perspective (which it would).

 

[blssdwlf]

I'm assuming this was mentioned but maybe not: My understanding is that the hangar miniature was a forced perspective. You can see it in Jefferies' drawings because the observation deck structures taper down.

Unlike the drawings, the flight deck (hangar) miniature was not built with a forced perspective. The observation galleries when viewed from a reverse angle (rear to front) have a proper vanishing point which would be impossible if it was built with a forced perspective, IMHO.

 

[Henoch]

Taper.

Tapper is an arcade game where you serve beer/root beer.

Yes, taper, not tapper. Oops.

You are correct in that the darker wall section closest to the doors around the aft alcove has a different taper angle than the rest of the inside walls. For the most part, the inside walls on average appear to stay parallel to the outer hull. The observation deck also tapers with the inside hull (laterally - vertically they remain the same height from fore to aft).

Thanks, @blssdwlf, this answers my questions.

 

[Mytran]

Just speculating but that shape is also what you would get if Datin's dimensions applied to the inside size of the openings at each end. Which, given the extra plywood we see in that behind-the-scenes shot with the E in the foreground, might actually be the case. IOW, the tops of the skinny triangles in the above image would represent the wooden arch on the door end, the top side of the trapezoid that smaller opening of that arch, the bottom side of the trapezoid the larger opening at the forward end of the model, and the right and left sides of the white rectangle the walls of the hangar..

Actually, thinking about it the taper would be a bit more severe since the 122" length would include the semicircle at the end:

I did some measurements earlier in this thread and I believe the measurements of 60"x 30" represent the inner walls of the model, as the height/width ratios.

This also seems to be the perimeter of the clamshell doors, according to a photo taken from another angle:

 

[Mres_was_framed!]

Yeah, I think referencing the observation deck left too much room for interpretation as the illustration doesn't really match what was filmed.

However, the alcoves below would be subject to less interpretation as it is almost vertical with the inner wall and outer hull.

So to update, you'd have a minimum clearance of the width of the alcoves and the ceiling of the observation decks overlooking the flight deck (whichever is greater).

The windows thing is not as important as the direction of the forces felt by the crew as they sped up, turned sharply to port etc, which would be rather discombobulating if the Bridge appeared to face forward but didn't.

I like the "vanity" explanation for the TOS-E but the TMP refit didn't do away with that setup, but embraced it! After all, now the captain can admired from both sides at once, depending on which crew use which turbolift

There's definitely a taper because the set dimensions which Datin provided describe a slightly conical shape.

Looking at these two posts, I could believe that there is room to squeeze Power Transfer Conduits around the the shuttlebay. If the Observation Galleries are like those in "Conscience of the King," even half that width would easily fit conduits sized like those seen in TNG. TMP may have ones of different diameter, but because of the forced perspective, it is hard to tell.

Unlike the drawings, the flight deck (hangar) miniature was not built with a forced perspective. The observation galleries when viewed from a reverse angle (rear to front) have a proper vanishing point which would be impossible if it was built with a forced perspective, IMHO.

I'll try to describe this in words. The upper area of the ceiling is lit, but to the side of the lit part of the ceiling are "fins." Could these "fins" be the mounts for the pylons, with power transfer conduits inside? Does this affect the "taper" of the room?

 

[BK613]

Actually, thinking about it the taper would be a bit more severe since the 122" length would include the semicircle at the end:

Yes, I edited my post to reflect the taper.

Edit to add: Phil Broad's blueprint puts the span between nacelle centers at 11' 10". Since the nacelles pretty much line up with the "launch tracks" seems to me we have a ruler for the size of the thing.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Looking at these two posts, I could believe that there is room to squeeze Power Transfer Conduits around the the shuttlebay. If the Observation Galleries are like those in "Conscience of the King," even half that width would easily fit conduits sized like those seen in TNG. TMP may have ones of different diameter, but because of the forced perspective, it is hard to tell.



I'll try to describe this in words. The upper area of the ceiling is lit, but to the side of the lit part of the ceiling are "fins." Could these "fins" be the mounts for the pylons, with power transfer conduits inside? Does this affect the "taper" of the room?

Are the "fins" at the correct angles from the central axis of the secondary hull for that?

 

[blssdwlf]

Looking at these two posts, I could believe that there is room to squeeze Power Transfer Conduits around the the shuttlebay. If the Observation Galleries are like those in "Conscience of the King," even half that width would easily fit conduits sized like those seen in TNG. TMP may have ones of different diameter, but because of the forced perspective, it is hard to tell.



I'll try to describe this in words. The upper area of the ceiling is lit, but to the side of the lit part of the ceiling are "fins." Could these "fins" be the mounts for the pylons, with power transfer conduits inside? Does this affect the "taper" of the room?

A long time ago I played around with that space. You can see where the pylons connect. There are some ribbed frames between the first third of the pylon space that I put in as an experiment but could also be just flat since it was never seen (behind the camera).