Yes, at the end of "The Enterprise Incident."
Is the bridge at a funny angle?
- Thread starter Mike Doyle
- Start date
Now I'm not a very technology minded person but it seems to me that all a supposed "stand by lift" would create is potential for collusions and for the lifts to block each other's path.
At that point it seems to me it would have been better to just create a second turbo lift shaft.
At that point it seems to me it would have been better to just create a second turbo lift shaft.
You know the other day I was just thinking, it's been a while since the BBS had a good debate on the offset bridge.
Or
d. You put the turbolift behind the captain where it was arguably meant to be all along, had it not been for the needs of television directors to stage a pleasing shot.
It always surprises me that fans are willing to alter ceiling height, corridor placement, room size etc for pretty much any set used in the show (justifying it with "that was just the limits of TV production and this is how it would really have looked" yet the placement of the turbolift on the Bridge is religiously adhered to.
And while the "Kirk needs to see who's coming onto the Bridge" retcon is persuasive on the surface, if such a function were really so important then the door would be better off on the side of the captain, not mostly behind him. In any case, Matt Jefferies was an aviator - to him there was nothing wrong with having the main access behind the pilot. The captain has more important things to do than play doorman!
I do recall those exchanges!
If I remember rightly, he ended up selecting your option "A", didn't he?
Such a solution would also allow the placement of the second turbolift seen in TAS
Why does the bridge have to face forward? On the Discovery/Strange New Worlds and Kelvin universe Enteprises I get it because of the window. But TOS can be offset and it make zero difference.
Is it just some "must be straight to go forward!" thinking?
Is it just some "must be straight to go forward!" thinking?
Because inertial dampeners are imperfect. As seen many, many times in the show the crew get buffeted around willy nilly, be it from acceleration, weapons fire, collisions etc. In such situations it helps to know instinctively which direction the opposing force is coming from so the crew can "brace for impact" etc and not have to calculate an additional 36 degrees on top of that.
There is no reason for it not to be facing forward. And as @Mytran said making the bridge facing forward gives less chance for human error.
Doesn’t Spock’s ship dock to a hatch on the bulge in TMP? If so, it makes a lot of sense for the ship to be a bit bigger and the turbolifts not staying in the bulge.
One might wonder how to get from the bridge to the bulge, but I remember seeing images of them just using the turbolift, with the lift turning around!
One might wonder how to get from the bridge to the bulge, but I remember seeing images of them just using the turbolift, with the lift turning around!
But then you're applying a bit of real life to Trek, and in real life inertial dampner failure won't just knock you out of your seat, it'll turn you into a thin paste on the turbolift door.
If it was a real window you'd need that stuff for manual piloting (again, like the recent movies or Discovery), but when there's just a TV screen it's pointless. You're essentially piloting a videogame ship.
If you start applying logic to Star Trek designs, soon you're asking why the Enterprise is the silly shape that it is and everything comes crumbling down...
Last edited:
That is only applicable to the three center seats; the perimeter seats already have varying "angles of toss" so the 36 degree offset wouldn't matter to them anyway (and the situation compounded by the fact they all face outward with their backs to the center of a round room. So no ready references to the room's orientation.)
Besides, if the Starfleet designers were really worried about the crew being tossed about, they'd start by fixing those knee-high "safety" rails.
The angle to Port is supported on-screen by the helm/navigator mostly flung out of their chairs to Starboard.
Yes, he had a very long conversation with the Romulan Commander, while multiple deck-lights flashed past in the window. I suspect Spock somehow programmed the car to take a roundabout route to deck 2 so he'd have some time to chat up the lady.
I was about to get offended and it turned into a forehead slap. Crap, you're right. Rookie mistake.
I'll be in my room.
Good point. To really add fuel to the fire, insert random comment on bridge +:
-a: Helen Noel
-b: doomsday episode was over rated and the acting horrible
-c: comment on 1960s attitudes towards sex and/or women
then run for cover.......
with that being said, this is a fun read.
Oh, yeah, thanks - that's TEI. Another reason why that episode is at the bottom of my lists and is (IMO) the most overrated Star Trek episode. How hard would it have been to have Spock say "Deck Fifteen" there?
Are these three options disjunctive or conjunctive? I've always figured that having the bridge dropping down into some portion of Deck Two solved the whole issue without any other steps.
Do you really want to put your guest in the connecting dorsal where the refit will eventually put the torpedo tubes?
Deck 14 was large enough for Doctor Van Gelder to run around and almost evade capture in Dagger Of The Mind
Similar threads
