My TOS shuttlecraft (continued)...
- Thread starter Warped9
- Start date
Re: My TOS shuttelcraft (continued)...
Looking for further examples I came across – guess what? the
Lear 35 (8 Seats)
[FONT=Arial]
[/FONT]
Telluride Flights is pleased to arrange for charter this Light Jet for speedy and efficient travel. The smallest of the Lear Jets, this aircraft is perfectly suited for the business or leisure traveler who needs to travel quickly to reach their destination. Though smaller than its sibling (Lear 60), the Lear 35 is not short on luxury. This aircraft is equipped with two flat-screen monitors for computer or entertainment use, creamy beige Italian leather seats, ample legroom for our taller travelers, and large fold-down tables for last minute computer work or better yet for indulging in a delicious meal. Call us for a quote on this aircraft
Specifications:
Seating capacity: 8, Cabin Length: 13', Cabin Height: 4'8", Cabin Width: 4'9".
It seems to me that our three heroes would have quite a bit of space in a cabin of comparable size. What do you think?
Looking for further examples I came across – guess what? the
Lear 35 (8 Seats)
[FONT=Arial]
Telluride Flights is pleased to arrange for charter this Light Jet for speedy and efficient travel. The smallest of the Lear Jets, this aircraft is perfectly suited for the business or leisure traveler who needs to travel quickly to reach their destination. Though smaller than its sibling (Lear 60), the Lear 35 is not short on luxury. This aircraft is equipped with two flat-screen monitors for computer or entertainment use, creamy beige Italian leather seats, ample legroom for our taller travelers, and large fold-down tables for last minute computer work or better yet for indulging in a delicious meal. Call us for a quote on this aircraft
Specifications:
Seating capacity: 8, Cabin Length: 13', Cabin Height: 4'8", Cabin Width: 4'9".
It seems to me that our three heroes would have quite a bit of space in a cabin of comparable size. What do you think?
Re: My TOS shuttelcraft (continued)...
Yes, in my mind I'm leaning to thinking in something of these terms.
In my mind ceiling height is greatly dependent upon how the vehicle is meant to be used. On something like the aquashuttle you really don't need a lot of ceiling height because it's a very short range vehicle that you're not expected to spend much time in. However, a general purpose or long range shuttlecraft like the Class F, Class H or Class J (scoutship) needs more room simply you're expected to spend more time in it, from several hours to days or perhaps even a couple of weeks at the extreme. You also need the necessary amenities for extended habitation such as waste management and food/beverage supplies.
For the heavy lander imagine it in terms of a 23rd century Apollo lunar lander, but with more room, limited warp drive and not having to go to the bathroom in your EVA suit.
Looking for further examples I came across – guess what? the
Lear 35 (8 Seats)
Telluride Flights is pleased to arrange for charter this Light Jet for speedy and efficient travel. The smallest of the Lear Jets, this aircraft is perfectly suited for the business or leisure traveler who needs to travel quickly to reach their destination. Though smaller than its sibling (Lear 60), the Lear 35 is not short on luxury. This aircraft is equipped with two flat-screen monitors for computer or entertainment use, creamy beige Italian leather seats, ample legroom for our taller travelers, and large fold-down tables for last minute computer work or better yet for indulging in a delicious meal. Call us for a quote on this aircraft
Specifications:
Seating capacity: 8, Cabin Length: 13', Cabin Height: 4'8", Cabin Width: 4'9".
It seems to me that our three heroes would have quite a bit of space in a cabin of comparable size. What do you think?
Yes, in my mind I'm leaning to thinking in something of these terms.
In my mind ceiling height is greatly dependent upon how the vehicle is meant to be used. On something like the aquashuttle you really don't need a lot of ceiling height because it's a very short range vehicle that you're not expected to spend much time in. However, a general purpose or long range shuttlecraft like the Class F, Class H or Class J (scoutship) needs more room simply you're expected to spend more time in it, from several hours to days or perhaps even a couple of weeks at the extreme. You also need the necessary amenities for extended habitation such as waste management and food/beverage supplies.
For the heavy lander imagine it in terms of a 23rd century Apollo lunar lander, but with more room, limited warp drive and not having to go to the bathroom in your EVA suit.
Re: My TOS shuttelcraft (continued)...
Very true. Strangely I keep thinking of how I might design these vehicles if I was starting from scratch rather than trying to adapt existing forms.
Re: My TOS shuttelcraft (continued)...
Sure, the idea of spending weeks in a craft like that are not appealing, but most of the times I envision a flight to last in the area of one or two days, considering it to be a fast craft and the fact that Star Trek ships always travel at the speed of plot, LOL.
So it still might not be perfect for ambassadorial duty like we have seen the TOS shuttle to be used for several times, but here we have military personnel, used to make do with what is available to get the mission accomplished. In 1965, Frank Borman and James Lovell spent two weeks in their tiny Gemini spacecraft.
Or, to give it another twist, AFAIK Bill Shatner lived in some kind of car for an extended time in the early seventies. Of course he could get out at any time to stretch his legs. So we should certainly give this scoutship convertible seats-to-beds. As they use artificial gravity, the crew could even be given the feeling of being upright while flat on their back (how is that for thinking out of the box?).
Sure, the idea of spending weeks in a craft like that are not appealing, but most of the times I envision a flight to last in the area of one or two days, considering it to be a fast craft and the fact that Star Trek ships always travel at the speed of plot, LOL.
So it still might not be perfect for ambassadorial duty like we have seen the TOS shuttle to be used for several times, but here we have military personnel, used to make do with what is available to get the mission accomplished. In 1965, Frank Borman and James Lovell spent two weeks in their tiny Gemini spacecraft.
Or, to give it another twist, AFAIK Bill Shatner lived in some kind of car for an extended time in the early seventies. Of course he could get out at any time to stretch his legs. So we should certainly give this scoutship convertible seats-to-beds. As they use artificial gravity, the crew could even be given the feeling of being upright while flat on their back (how is that for thinking out of the box?).
Re: My TOS shuttelcraft (continued)...
Every now and then I've wondered what it might be like to see a sci-fi spacecraft where the crew's "living quarters" were nothing more than hostels -- tubes to sleep in. The other living spaces would all be "public." Hmm... sounds like a submarine.
Every now and then I've wondered what it might be like to see a sci-fi spacecraft where the crew's "living quarters" were nothing more than hostels -- tubes to sleep in. The other living spaces would all be "public." Hmm... sounds like a submarine.
Re: My TOS shuttelcraft (continued)...
Simple take the Warp Factor cubed figure and multiply it by .02 and you'll get a value in terms of light years per hour. I've already applied it to my Class F and Class H shuttlecraft right on the History and Specifications sheet.
Curiously one of GR's early drafts for his series proposal referenced the starship's cruising speed in terms of .73 light years per hour. A cute bit of coincidental trivia.
Actually I have a sheet of all the warp factor values worked out with my formula. I'll dig it up and post it. And I could even consider including it with these shuttlecraft plans. I must emphasize that this formula was worked out using only TOS references as a starting point and ignoring everything from the '80s onward. Besides which the references in TOS make the Enterprise a lot faster than what was suggested about the 1701-D in TNG.
Well one little wrinkle with my tech stuff is that I've actually worked out how fast the warp drive values translate into real world terms. I did this for the sake of consistency accross the board.
Simple take the Warp Factor cubed figure and multiply it by .02 and you'll get a value in terms of light years per hour. I've already applied it to my Class F and Class H shuttlecraft right on the History and Specifications sheet.
Curiously one of GR's early drafts for his series proposal referenced the starship's cruising speed in terms of .73 light years per hour. A cute bit of coincidental trivia.
Actually I have a sheet of all the warp factor values worked out with my formula. I'll dig it up and post it. And I could even consider including it with these shuttlecraft plans. I must emphasize that this formula was worked out using only TOS references as a starting point and ignoring everything from the '80s onward. Besides which the references in TOS make the Enterprise a lot faster than what was suggested about the 1701-D in TNG.
Last edited:
Re: My TOS shuttelcraft (continued)...
I think that is the beauty of TAS, that we got shown (however slipshod) the added fleet diversity in the Trek universe. And I appreciate how you give those designs the attention due to them.
But especially for the heavy lander seen in "Mudd's Passion", I have to agree with you and think that this is the moment where it and the episode split off on their different paths: Use the concept as the spring board for the design of some heavy-duty craft that gets dispatched from star bases and the like, may be seen sometime and somewhere but will probably never end up in the Enterprise hangar. On the other hand re-animate the episode at some time using the established TOS shuttle and be done with it. The heavy lander is just not needed plot-wise - the implied sturdiness sure didn't help it any under the living avalanche. Voila: Problem about size solved for that one.
For the scout ship, of course, I foresee the opposite strategy: As would be done in the real world, size it sufficiently small for it to become part of the standard complement. I am sure it will work and it will be just sweet.
I also support statements you made earlier: The biggest problem will be to re-imagine the aqua shuttle. IMHO, it is implied in "The Ambergris Element" that it, too, is part of the standard complement of the Enterprise, so it, too, has to fit into the 8 by 5 by 3 meter box. To achieve that, make it plausible from an engineering point of view and give it the resemblance necessary to accept those images seen (and contradicting each other) as stylised interpretations of this "real" shuttle will be quite a brain teaser.
I am excited about the things to come.
I think that is the beauty of TAS, that we got shown (however slipshod) the added fleet diversity in the Trek universe. And I appreciate how you give those designs the attention due to them.
But especially for the heavy lander seen in "Mudd's Passion", I have to agree with you and think that this is the moment where it and the episode split off on their different paths: Use the concept as the spring board for the design of some heavy-duty craft that gets dispatched from star bases and the like, may be seen sometime and somewhere but will probably never end up in the Enterprise hangar. On the other hand re-animate the episode at some time using the established TOS shuttle and be done with it. The heavy lander is just not needed plot-wise - the implied sturdiness sure didn't help it any under the living avalanche. Voila: Problem about size solved for that one.
For the scout ship, of course, I foresee the opposite strategy: As would be done in the real world, size it sufficiently small for it to become part of the standard complement. I am sure it will work and it will be just sweet.
I also support statements you made earlier: The biggest problem will be to re-imagine the aqua shuttle. IMHO, it is implied in "The Ambergris Element" that it, too, is part of the standard complement of the Enterprise, so it, too, has to fit into the 8 by 5 by 3 meter box. To achieve that, make it plausible from an engineering point of view and give it the resemblance necessary to accept those images seen (and contradicting each other) as stylised interpretations of this "real" shuttle will be quite a brain teaser.
I am excited about the things to come.
Re: My TOS shuttelcraft (continued)...
I posted this in another thread, but I think it's relevant here. I've emboldened the most relevant part.
I posted this in another thread, but I think it's relevant here. I've emboldened the most relevant part.
Re: My TOS shuttelcraft (continued)...
Probert's design for the TNG shuttle was nice. Too bad we didn't really see it the way he intended. Over time I've mellowed in regards to some of the TNG designs, particularly Probert's shuttle and the 1701D. I also like the DS9 runabouts, the Defiant and the Chaffee shuttlecraft. I don't care for any of the rest of TNG, DS9 or VOY ships. Although I cannot stand ENT as a series and much of what they rolled out they did have a handful of alien ship designs that I liked. Curiously I think their Romulan BoP is nice, but as a TMP era version of the BoP and definately not as a century old predecessor. And there was a Xindi shuttle I thought was rather oddly neat.
For those who may be curious:
Of course, it's impossible to reconcile everything speed related in Star Trek, but my approach does make the references onscreen seemingly more consistent and credible within the context of the stories. One thing I had to throw away was the notion that Warp One was the speed of light. It may be fictional, but even in Star Trek nothing was supposed to travel at the speed of light. And it was also strange that the Enterprise often left orbit only at Warp One if it actually was only the speed of light. My formula also acknowledges the reference to Warp .5 in TMP.
This formula also makes the shuttlecraft viable spacecraft with reasonable range even with limited warp capability. It means a shuttlecraft can comfortable reach anything within 20-50 light years within a reasonable period of time.
Probert's design for the TNG shuttle was nice. Too bad we didn't really see it the way he intended. Over time I've mellowed in regards to some of the TNG designs, particularly Probert's shuttle and the 1701D. I also like the DS9 runabouts, the Defiant and the Chaffee shuttlecraft. I don't care for any of the rest of TNG, DS9 or VOY ships. Although I cannot stand ENT as a series and much of what they rolled out they did have a handful of alien ship designs that I liked. Curiously I think their Romulan BoP is nice, but as a TMP era version of the BoP and definately not as a century old predecessor. And there was a Xindi shuttle I thought was rather oddly neat.
For those who may be curious:
Of course, it's impossible to reconcile everything speed related in Star Trek, but my approach does make the references onscreen seemingly more consistent and credible within the context of the stories. One thing I had to throw away was the notion that Warp One was the speed of light. It may be fictional, but even in Star Trek nothing was supposed to travel at the speed of light. And it was also strange that the Enterprise often left orbit only at Warp One if it actually was only the speed of light. My formula also acknowledges the reference to Warp .5 in TMP.
This formula also makes the shuttlecraft viable spacecraft with reasonable range even with limited warp capability. It means a shuttlecraft can comfortable reach anything within 20-50 light years within a reasonable period of time.
Last edited:
Re: My TOS shuttelcraft (continued)...
People were cheering because of the coolness of HOW the 1701-D met its fate, not because it did... we finally got to see the coolness of a Galaxy-Class saucer section making planetfall. That was something to be in awe of, especially seeing it on the big screen.
I very much disagree that Breman and Co. viewed the D as just hardware... on the contrary... they were just trying to show the D die in a more profound way than just showing it blow up and fall into an atmosphere, burning. With the saucer on the surface, and the star drive section gone, there is a lingering tone of finality to the situation.
The E is a beautiful and graceful vessel. If the Enterprise-D was a large and comfy wood and leather-clad 1980's Cadillac sedan, then the Enterprise-E is a sleek and agile Mercedes McLaren SLR.
People were cheering because of the coolness of HOW the 1701-D met its fate, not because it did... we finally got to see the coolness of a Galaxy-Class saucer section making planetfall. That was something to be in awe of, especially seeing it on the big screen.
I very much disagree that Breman and Co. viewed the D as just hardware... on the contrary... they were just trying to show the D die in a more profound way than just showing it blow up and fall into an atmosphere, burning. With the saucer on the surface, and the star drive section gone, there is a lingering tone of finality to the situation.
The E is a beautiful and graceful vessel. If the Enterprise-D was a large and comfy wood and leather-clad 1980's Cadillac sedan, then the Enterprise-E is a sleek and agile Mercedes McLaren SLR.
Re: My TOS shuttelcraft (continued)...
A seak peek at the unfinished cover sheet. The turntable/elevator needs to be enlargened about 10-15% and a shuttlecraft will be added.
Way back when I first envisioned this project I was initially planning on using a photoshopped photo for the cover, but since then I think an illustration is more representative of the interior art and perhaps cleaner looking. I also wanted the art to evoke something of the style seen in some of the illustrations in The Making Of Star Trek.
A seak peek at the unfinished cover sheet. The turntable/elevator needs to be enlargened about 10-15% and a shuttlecraft will be added.
Way back when I first envisioned this project I was initially planning on using a photoshopped photo for the cover, but since then I think an illustration is more representative of the interior art and perhaps cleaner looking. I also wanted the art to evoke something of the style seen in some of the illustrations in The Making Of Star Trek.
Last edited:
Re: My TOS shuttelcraft (continued)...
I used a screencap as a base reference then used Illustrator to make it look clean.
It isn't an exact copy because the screencsp shot is not truly centered. And I only drew half the image then flipped it to get a precise symetrical whole image.
I've also been giving some further thought to the form(s) this will finally take. All along I planned this as a set of 11x7 in. sheets which I can easily make in PDF form. And as I've said before I will be forwarding a few of these sets gratis to those who have been great of great help during this work.
Another form this can take is a PDF set of 8x11 in. sheets or as a bound hardcopy of 8x11 zine like form. I think I could get this put together for a reasonable cost and then priced shipping and handling included for about $10-$20 Canadian or US.
The final form is the one I'm really keen on. The large sheets on CD that would allow me to add extra material as well as perhaps sound files. Actually the best way for this approach is to wait until I have other projects to include on the CD while having the plans themselves available as they're completed.
I used a screencap as a base reference then used Illustrator to make it look clean.
It isn't an exact copy because the screencsp shot is not truly centered. And I only drew half the image then flipped it to get a precise symetrical whole image.
I've also been giving some further thought to the form(s) this will finally take. All along I planned this as a set of 11x7 in. sheets which I can easily make in PDF form. And as I've said before I will be forwarding a few of these sets gratis to those who have been great of great help during this work.
Another form this can take is a PDF set of 8x11 in. sheets or as a bound hardcopy of 8x11 zine like form. I think I could get this put together for a reasonable cost and then priced shipping and handling included for about $10-$20 Canadian or US.
The final form is the one I'm really keen on. The large sheets on CD that would allow me to add extra material as well as perhaps sound files. Actually the best way for this approach is to wait until I have other projects to include on the CD while having the plans themselves available as they're completed.
Last edited: