Matt Jefferies original shuttle design
- Thread starter RedSpar
- Start date
OK, OK You guys sucked me back in.
I dug up my Jefferies shuttle model and rendered these images to real life scale.
I had a very old model of the Type 7 TOS shuttle from FourManMen sitting in the dusty corner of my harddrive somewhere to use as a comparison in size.
So here you go:
And to the question of will it fit in the shuttlebay...Well, lets find out...
I had this VERY old model of the Big E from Vektor (He'll probably kill me for using it since it's ancient) made everything to scale and rendered it in the shuttle bay.
It fits.... baaaareely...
You definitely aint getting more than one of those puppies in there that is for sure.
I dug up my Jefferies shuttle model and rendered these images to real life scale.
I had a very old model of the Type 7 TOS shuttle from FourManMen sitting in the dusty corner of my harddrive somewhere to use as a comparison in size.
So here you go:
And to the question of will it fit in the shuttlebay...Well, lets find out...
I had this VERY old model of the Big E from Vektor (He'll probably kill me for using it since it's ancient) made everything to scale and rendered it in the shuttle bay.
It fits.... baaaareely...
You definitely aint getting more than one of those puppies in there that is for sure.
Well I haven't modeled the interior, but my hunch is no for standing room. I'd say it would be similar to a Lear or Bombadier private jet where you have to bend over a bit. The rest of the interior space would be for cargo and mechanicals. I always thought the type 7 was just too small to go from orbit to surface and back on a away mission and have any useful gear to take with you. It's like taking a 14ft ski boat to explore Antartica. Just too small....
Ok, sounds perfect.
Speaking of smaller craft, the Galileo was apparently based on some of Jefferies "dockyard" craft sketches, and probably wasn't originally intended to be a full fledged shuttle anyway? Even the Avanti variant lacked nacelles, so make of that what you will?
Speaking of smaller craft, the Galileo was apparently based on some of Jefferies "dockyard" craft sketches, and probably wasn't originally intended to be a full fledged shuttle anyway? Even the Avanti variant lacked nacelles, so make of that what you will?
OK, OK You guys sucked me back in.
I dug up my Jefferies shuttle model and rendered these images to real life scale.
I had a very old model of the Type 7 TOS shuttle from FourManMen sitting in the dusty corner of my harddrive somewhere to use as a comparison in size.
So here you go:
And to the question of will it fit in the shuttlebay...Well, lets find out...
I had this VERY old model of the Big E from Vektor (He'll probably kill me for using it since it's ancient) made everything to scale and rendered it in the shuttle bay.
It fits.... baaaareely...
My jaw just dropped and smashed into pieces
It looks just too big!
I love Jefferies' original design for the shuttlecraft, but it seems too big or the scale of E that you're using isn't the right scale?
Aridas at one point did his own version of the E and he had came up with a crossection with plenty of room for Jefferies' original designed shuttlecraft.
What would happen if you scale the design closer to the TOS shuttle design.
Matching closer the scale of those engines against the size of the nacelles on Jefferies' original design.
If you adjusted the scale more, it looks like you'd still have enough room for personnel to move around and stand up in there?
As you scaled it, it looks more to be at a size equivalent to a more modern Star Fleet runabout.
What do think?
I love Jefferies' original design for the shuttlecraft, but it seems too big or the scale of E that you're using isn't the right scale?
Aridas at one point did his own version of the E and he had came up with a crossection with plenty of room for Jefferies' original designed shuttlecraft.
What would happen if you scale the design closer to the TOS shuttle design.
Matching closer the scale of those engines against the size of the nacelles on Jefferies' original design.
If you adjusted the scale more, it looks like you'd still have enough room for personnel to move around and stand up in there?
As you scaled it, it looks more to be at a size equivalent to a more modern Star Fleet runabout.
What do think?
Oh I assure you the Enterprise is at the proper scale. It's just with the wings and pylon design of the J.Shuttle make it very wide. It's almost as wide as it is long - not great for optimum deck space (folding wings could be a remedy)
In my opinion the Enterprise shuttle bay itself is too small even for Type 7 shuttles. It barely has room for 4 small shuttles which really isn't practical for a starship that visits star systems all over the galaxy and conducts military operations.
Look at it this way - a present day Sea King naval helicopter that is based on aircraft carriers is 54 (fuselage) feet long, 8ft longer than my shuttle and at least as wide if you count the rotor blades..and this is just an aircraft not a spacecraft. IMO Trek shuttle craft are ridiculously small.
I could scale the J.shuttle down to a type 7 size but the interior space would be even worse than the already poor type 7. I'm pretty sure when Matt Jefferies penned this shuttle they hadn't even come to a decision on the size of the Enterprise or it's shuttle bay yet.
Probably one of the few things they did get right in the NuTrek movie is scale up the Enterprise so it can hold many large shuttles. It just make sense.
Who knows maybe I'll design a new-old TOS Enterprise the accommodates this shuttle
In my opinion the Enterprise shuttle bay itself is too small even for Type 7 shuttles. It barely has room for 4 small shuttles which really isn't practical for a starship that visits star systems all over the galaxy and conducts military operations.
Look at it this way - a present day Sea King naval helicopter that is based on aircraft carriers is 54 (fuselage) feet long, 8ft longer than my shuttle and at least as wide if you count the rotor blades..and this is just an aircraft not a spacecraft. IMO Trek shuttle craft are ridiculously small.
I could scale the J.shuttle down to a type 7 size but the interior space would be even worse than the already poor type 7. I'm pretty sure when Matt Jefferies penned this shuttle they hadn't even come to a decision on the size of the Enterprise or it's shuttle bay yet.
Probably one of the few things they did get right in the NuTrek movie is scale up the Enterprise so it can hold many large shuttles. It just make sense.
Who knows maybe I'll design a new-old TOS Enterprise the accommodates this shuttle
I see your point about the amount of gear, but the problem is the Enterprise wasn't built to carry that kind of craft; it would just block the shuttlebay. The Type 7 is a good size for the accomodations, and I don't feel like it would be meant for carrying a lot of heavy equipment; it just carries passengers from ship to shore.
And you can stand upright in a Type 7, right? Seems like they should be able to stand upright in the MJ shuttle as well as, if not better than, the Type 7, judging by the comaprison.
I would be curious to see the MJ rescaled to the approximate size of the Galileol would that work as a simple passenger vehicle? Even if you couldn't stand quite upright.
And you can stand upright in a Type 7, right? Seems like they should be able to stand upright in the MJ shuttle as well as, if not better than, the Type 7, judging by the comaprison.
I would be curious to see the MJ rescaled to the approximate size of the Galileol would that work as a simple passenger vehicle? Even if you couldn't stand quite upright.
You can based on the interior set of the shuttle, but not based on the exterior mockup. One of the continuing issues with the original show is that the interior set does not actually fit into the full scale mockup built for the show.
Even if you couldn't stad fully upright, though, it would still be a poractical vehicle for simple passenger transport if not for full-scale planetary exploration missions; they're simple auxiliary craft designed to get people from ship to surface, and occasionally more extended missions (e.g.,"Metamorphosis", "Galileo 7".
I think Starfleet must have had other vehicles more capable for extended planetary exploration than Type 7 shuttlecraft, but they were never seen on the show.
RedSpar --
If I may make a suggestion, you might want to add a little detail to those nacelles. Maybe some kind of intercooler and or vent on the outside at the back, and maybe something like the reactor control loop etc that's on the inboard side of the Enterprise nacelles. These are so big in comparison to the nacelles on Galileo that you might want to communicate that they are more like the big 1701 nacelles in function.
As far as scaling goes, as Nascence pointed out, I made this shuttle much smaller. You can see where I ended up by checking out my 1701 cross section here. Not that this should influence you in any way -- I was trying to do what I thought would have been done had the shuttle been adopted for the show. I think it would have been scaled to fit the hangar. But I like the idea of it being a bigass shuttle as well, with room for 25 passengers and gear. It tends to make it a bit more distinctive this way. Though it does just barely fit through those flight doors, that shouldn't be an issue with tractor beam landings.
If I may make a suggestion, you might want to add a little detail to those nacelles. Maybe some kind of intercooler and or vent on the outside at the back, and maybe something like the reactor control loop etc that's on the inboard side of the Enterprise nacelles. These are so big in comparison to the nacelles on Galileo that you might want to communicate that they are more like the big 1701 nacelles in function.
As far as scaling goes, as Nascence pointed out, I made this shuttle much smaller. You can see where I ended up by checking out my 1701 cross section here. Not that this should influence you in any way -- I was trying to do what I thought would have been done had the shuttle been adopted for the show. I think it would have been scaled to fit the hangar. But I like the idea of it being a bigass shuttle as well, with room for 25 passengers and gear. It tends to make it a bit more distinctive this way. Though it does just barely fit through those flight doors, that shouldn't be an issue with tractor beam landings.
Aridas-
Oh there is no doubt it needs more detail work, like I said before it really is only about 85% done. It has no real textures yet except for just a few starfleet decals, no rear landing gear, no interior etc. I just got busy with RL and work and just lost interest in it.
Regarding scaling there is problems you run into that give you issues in 3d that you wouldn't normally notice in a 2d drawing. When you scale the ship up to the correct size so that a normal person can fit thru the hatch/door, the ship comes out bigger than the 2d drawings would indicate.
I could try to scale it down - take 20% or so out of the midsection width and 20-30% of the overall size. But I worry about the door being too small without revisions.
To really be practical to save deck space it needs landing gear in the fuselage instead of the wings and the wings need to fold up like a navy jet.
BTW I love your cross section of the 1701. It does show however how little space the Enterprise has for shuttle storage.
I model 3d houses for a living, so once I get my current batch of houses done (next week or so) I'll try to go back and make some changes and finish it up.
Oh there is no doubt it needs more detail work, like I said before it really is only about 85% done. It has no real textures yet except for just a few starfleet decals, no rear landing gear, no interior etc. I just got busy with RL and work and just lost interest in it.
Regarding scaling there is problems you run into that give you issues in 3d that you wouldn't normally notice in a 2d drawing. When you scale the ship up to the correct size so that a normal person can fit thru the hatch/door, the ship comes out bigger than the 2d drawings would indicate.
I could try to scale it down - take 20% or so out of the midsection width and 20-30% of the overall size. But I worry about the door being too small without revisions.
To really be practical to save deck space it needs landing gear in the fuselage instead of the wings and the wings need to fold up like a navy jet.
BTW I love your cross section of the 1701. It does show however how little space the Enterprise has for shuttle storage.
I model 3d houses for a living, so once I get my current batch of houses done (next week or so) I'll try to go back and make some changes and finish it up.
You know, considering the size and style, this design would have made a better Aurora than the one we got in TOS-R's "Way to Eden".
Re: Matt Jeffries original shuttle design
Hey, RedSpar.
I haven't been around a lot, but I stumbled on this thread today. I HAVE to say, I LOVE what you did with this design. I was looking at the two pictures above and was thinking...
If you do a later variant or variants of this shuttle, there is one thing you COULD try...
When I look at the picture of the shuttle in your cul-de-sac, I ALMOST see a gentle crease in the metal running around the top of the upper hull(due to reflections on the hull). You COULD create a subtle crease here that would wrap around to the second 'step' down (as seen from the rear view). If this was done, it might further help 'TOS'ify the craft without going TOO far afield from what Mr. Jeffries came up with.
'She's a THING of beauty...' As Mr. Scott would say...
Be well.
Greg
Hey, RedSpar.
I haven't been around a lot, but I stumbled on this thread today. I HAVE to say, I LOVE what you did with this design. I was looking at the two pictures above and was thinking...
If you do a later variant or variants of this shuttle, there is one thing you COULD try...
When I look at the picture of the shuttle in your cul-de-sac, I ALMOST see a gentle crease in the metal running around the top of the upper hull(due to reflections on the hull). You COULD create a subtle crease here that would wrap around to the second 'step' down (as seen from the rear view). If this was done, it might further help 'TOS'ify the craft without going TOO far afield from what Mr. Jeffries came up with.
'She's a THING of beauty...' As Mr. Scott would say...
Be well.
Greg
Hey, I don't want to hijack this thread, but I've always loved this cross section, Aridas. Is there some place where you have posted any kind of technical commentary on what's going on in there? Many of the details are intriguing and I want to know more...
--Alex
I've collected all my posts about it and all my detail images. I only need to post all those images online and then I can add them to the FRS website. So keep watching. 
FYI I know I went overboard trimming the scale down to 32' long. What I meant was not to embrace my scale so much as to find some reasonable middle ground.
FYI I know I went overboard trimming the scale down to 32' long. What I meant was not to embrace my scale so much as to find some reasonable middle ground.
Ran across this from an external conversation. Very cool! Love the comparison pictures (now saved to my hard-drive).
