• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Is the bridge at a funny angle?

Is the bridge at a funny angle?


No, like Star Trek Quacknon, uh, excuse me, Canon, the bridge is at a deadly serious angle.


By the way, I just bought and moved into a new house. When you go into the master bedroom, there is a short passageway from the door that turns to the right at a 45 degree angle before it lets out into the room which is square with the house, the windows look out into the back yard.

I'm not kidding here, since I'm blind and can't see, I've already caromed off the 45 degree wall of the turn like a pinball twice when I forgot to jinks to the right.

So do you guys think this 45 degree jink in the passageway could be classified as being at a funny angle?

Robert
 
I think that I remember that some pages back someone suggested that maybe the bridge can tortate and change angle..

And just a few minutes before now, which is 9:20 pm EST, 09-13-2021, I had an idea about how that would work.

In a few of the early episodes of TOS, the turbolift had two doors, which of course is quite sensible. An inner door on the car, and an outer door at each destination. So, as in modern elevators, passengers are prevented from accidentially hittng the side of the tube as the car moves fast, or getting a body part stuck between the moving car and the tube and being horribly mangled.

So if we imagine the double door situation continues in all episodes of TO, the bridge can turn several times during an episode.

So the vertical turbolift shaft is in the nub on the rear centerline of the outer bidge domes, and the viewscreen is about (90 minus 36) or 54 degrees from the center of the turbolift door in the inner bridge wall.

The ship usually travels with the inner bridge dome viewscreen facing the foreward side of the Enterprise, and thus the inner door leading to the turbolift turned to the side and the turbolift inaccessible. So when the ship suddenly moves foreward everyone on the bridge leans back, and when the ship suddenly stops everyone on the bridge flies foreward toward the viewscreen.

But whens omeone wants to use the turbolift to enter or leave the bridge and presses the proper button on the bridge or in the turbolifet station, the bridge rotates until the bridge door to the turbolift shaft is lighted up with the opeing in the vertical turbolift tube, and when the turbolift arrives and opens its own door the door on the bridge also opens.

I note that the computers on the bridge might listen to conversations and note when someone is ordered or given permisson to leave the bridge. And the ship's computers might listen to conversations outside the doors to turbolift stops and also lsten to conversatinos inside the turbolifts, to hear who awnts to go to the bridge. In fact, I think I remember they usually state their destination aloud in the turbolift cars.

Thus the computers and the devices they control would have seconds to minutes to rotate the bridge so that the two doors aligned. Ina the shorter time frame of mre seconds people on the bridge might lean a little to right or left or feel a little dizzy if the bridge rotates fast enough to get the doors aligned in time.

But the bridge crew are Starleet officers who would have been trained and have lot of practice with such events and would not be bothered by it.

And if the inner bridge dome has its own inertial dampening field that rotates with the inner bridge dome nobody on the bridge would feel anything from such comparatively minor and easy to compensate for movements.
 
Only if you treat TOS as an entity independent of what came after, which is not the official view of the franchise, or we wouldn’t have all-encompassing reference books like the Star Trek Encyclopedia. Shows like DSC inform the official vision of TOS, by placing constraints on it that favor some interpretations over others.

If it weren’t like that, then to use a different example, you could have a different thread discussing whether or not TOS is set in the 2260s or even the 23rd century. Still another thread could debate circumstances surrounding Cochrane’s invention of space warp, totally disregarding the events in FC.

It’s not explicitly a behind-the-scenes thread, hence the suggestion to use a different title.

Actually I tend to judge the creators of later Star Trek productions on how accurately they agree with the rather vague date range suggested by TOS. It is just as accurate to wonder whether those productions happen when they allegedly do.

Arrgh! I just jost a couple of hours work on this post.
 
Last edited:
I recall proposing the rotating bridge many moons ago. I envisioned it working this way: The bridge faces forward, but twists quickly 35.5 degrees counter clockwise into position every time the music ramps up dramatically and Kirk dashes purposely for the turbolift.

Uhura, who is always perched decorously on the edge of her chair, pitches off it and lands on the deck with a thump on her lovely fantail...

Inertial dampeners weren't as advanced during TOS.

M.
 
Still pretty sad.
Par for the course of what I am reading around with Trek fans on various places. The need for this world to look and feel consistent pretty much ignores any real world realities. Star Trek is to feel good and that's it.
 
I like to poke fun in these discussions because I am very much of the "repeat to yourself 'It's a just a show, I should really just relax" camp. Personally, I think it's blatantly obvious the nub was meant to be the turbolift, and as to whether the viewer points straight ahead or not is entirely inconsequential.
 
^
I award bonus points for the MST3K reference in addition to your wider attitude. Yes, the nub was the turbolift shaft and its roof.
 
I like to poke fun in these discussions because I am very much of the "repeat to yourself 'It's a just a show, I should really just relax" camp. Personally, I think it's blatantly obvious the nub was meant to be the turbolift, and as to whether the viewer points straight ahead or not is entirely inconsequential.
Same here. I am always amazed at the, shall we say, intensity that the technical discussions spark.
 
Same here. I am always amazed at the, shall we say, intensity that the technical discussions spark.
Heh. I think how seriously I take this is ably demonstrated by my post saying I'd found proof that the bridge was set at a 35.5° angle.

23535
23536


:D
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top