Shatner's only 5'7"? Is that true? I thought he was like 5'9" or 5'10"...
Hmmm...
Hmmm...
My TOS Shuttlecraft...
- Thread starter Warped9
- Start date
Then what are you talking about? The ship doesn't need to be enlarged at all for the bridge to fit offset. It fits perfectly with the turbolift in the exterior tube as Jefferies designed it. When you invoked Capt. April's "sunken bridge" I naturally assumed you were talking about a forward-facing arrangement. If you weren't, then your original comment doesn't appear to make any sense.
Ah. Well, I've tried placing the original bridge into the external shape myself and I don't think it quite "fits perfectly." "Tallguy's" scale video shows pretty well, I think, the overall scaling issue, as he has a human-scaled figure standing ON the ship right next to the bridge dome... and the scale problem seems obvious to me there, as well.
To me, the overall size of the ship seems to be "misunderestimated."
I see what you're talking about now.
The bridge does fit as is and the exterior Turbolift tube is the key to how it fits. It is the proper distance from center to match the set in the top view, but in side view it indicates that the interior level of the bridge is lower than you might think. It actually fits just the way Jefferies shows it in his section view drawing -- still substantially contained in the dome, but with it's floor lower than the base of the dome.
Captain April's configuration shows it much lower than this due to his insistance that it face forward.
Mark
The bridge does fit as is and the exterior Turbolift tube is the key to how it fits. It is the proper distance from center to match the set in the top view, but in side view it indicates that the interior level of the bridge is lower than you might think. It actually fits just the way Jefferies shows it in his section view drawing -- still substantially contained in the dome, but with it's floor lower than the base of the dome.
Captain April's configuration shows it much lower than this due to his insistance that it face forward.
Mark
I like it. I recommend actually publishing this as a hardcopy if you can.
I AM curious, though... what's a "class F" and what's a "class H" shuttlecraft? Those are new terms in my experience...
I AM curious, though... what's a "class F" and what's a "class H" shuttlecraft? Those are new terms in my experience...
A Class F shuttlecraft is the familiar Galileo we saw in TOS. The Class H is a variant (pictured in my little cover sheet above) that is a conceptual takeoff from the Coprnicus shuttlecraft in TAS' "The Slaver Weapon." The Class H is a faster and longer range version of the Class F.
There's too much expense involved in hardcopy. It's far easier to share the files online and folks can print their own hardcopy.
There's too much expense involved in hardcopy. It's far easier to share the files online and folks can print their own hardcopy.
I very much like that image you've put together, Warped. Just eyeballing it, it seems to be quite in line with the relationship between the shuttlecraft and hangar I have in my cross section. Much more realistic than the cavernous impression we got from the TOS and TAS images.
^^ I've tried putting a 29 and 31.5 foot shuttlecraft into your cutaway, aridas, (matching your scale) and they do fit within your deck arrangements. My eventual ship cannot be less than 29'-1" but it's nice to know that I could let it get up to 31'-4" if necessary to get everything to fit right.
me2
Me3. I don't know why this has been happening lately. I'll try to post this again a little later.
What my little cutaway doesn't show (because it's preliminary and not yet finished) are the control panels along the length of the cabin, the ceiling lighting panel and the aft compartment arrangement. It also doesn't show that the internal access hatch opening will be smaller than the exterior access hatch. In my view this is the only way to keep the exterior and interior each appearing as they did onscreen. Also this is bolstered by the fact that even though the interior set allowed the actors to stand upright the they still had to duck their heads a bit to exit through the hatch as well as pass through to the aft compartment. I also think I've left just sufficient space under the floor for mechanicals to run undernesth just as we saw when Scotty was working in there through a floor service panel.
I've also got the idea that there will be overhead compartments (where the walls curve into the ceilin) that hold environmental gear (should there ever be a breach of the double hulls). In the aft compartment on the port side (which I don't think we ever truly saw) and opposite the starboard electrical access panel we saw Scotty at I'm interested in trying to install a small toilet and limited food supply storage/dispensing setup. I'm also thinking along the lines that much of the equipment they jettisoned in "The Galileo Seven" may well have been ripped out from this area. Recall also that in "Metamorphosis" we saw McCoy dispensing beverages. Sure he may have brought along a thrmos and perhaps even a cooler of snacks, but in the 23rd century it's more plausible that the shuttlecraft was equipped with at least limited facilities for food and waste disposal.
What my little cutaway doesn't show (because it's preliminary and not yet finished) are the control panels along the length of the cabin, the ceiling lighting panel and the aft compartment arrangement. It also doesn't show that the internal access hatch opening will be smaller than the exterior access hatch. In my view this is the only way to keep the exterior and interior each appearing as they did onscreen. Also this is bolstered by the fact that even though the interior set allowed the actors to stand upright the they still had to duck their heads a bit to exit through the hatch as well as pass through to the aft compartment. I also think I've left just sufficient space under the floor for mechanicals to run undernesth just as we saw when Scotty was working in there through a floor service panel.
I've also got the idea that there will be overhead compartments (where the walls curve into the ceilin) that hold environmental gear (should there ever be a breach of the double hulls). In the aft compartment on the port side (which I don't think we ever truly saw) and opposite the starboard electrical access panel we saw Scotty at I'm interested in trying to install a small toilet and limited food supply storage/dispensing setup. I'm also thinking along the lines that much of the equipment they jettisoned in "The Galileo Seven" may well have been ripped out from this area. Recall also that in "Metamorphosis" we saw McCoy dispensing beverages. Sure he may have brought along a thrmos and perhaps even a cooler of snacks, but in the 23rd century it's more plausible that the shuttlecraft was equipped with at least limited facilities for food and waste disposal.
Funny, I have been able to see it since you posted it.
Ah, for once, and only once, an advantage to having Comcast.
I'm interested in seeing where you go with this, Warped. Your detailing sounds... sound. Keep up the good work.
Ah, for once, and only once, an advantage to having Comcast.
I'm interested in seeing where you go with this, Warped. Your detailing sounds... sound. Keep up the good work.
^^ Thanks. My inspirations? Well, besides Star Trek itself and MJ's attention to detail and general gifted insight I was inspired by Phil Broad's work, FourMadMen's cgi shuttlecraft and more recently, aridas, your beautiful Enterprise cross section.
I've had a lot of these ideas for a long time, but it's only now I've been motivated to get off my ass, flesh them out and properly illustrate them.
Upon review the number of sheets my little Booklet Of General Plans will have will be about 17-20 to decently cover what I have in mind for both the Class F and Class H shuttlecraft.
In my little photomanip a few posts up I tried to make the filming miniature look more like the fullsize mock-up. This meant tweaking the positions of the vehicle's name and other markings. I also lowered the vehicle closer to the deck. You can also note the different hatch windows which subtly help distinguish the Class H ship from the Class F. And, of course, I changed the marking from Galileo to Copernicus NCC-1701/3.
The Class H will also have some other tweakings to distinguish it: a slightly different impulse engine design, different hatch windows and the internal arrangement will be somewhat altered. However, the size of the ship will remain exatly the same.
I've had a lot of these ideas for a long time, but it's only now I've been motivated to get off my ass, flesh them out and properly illustrate them.
Upon review the number of sheets my little Booklet Of General Plans will have will be about 17-20 to decently cover what I have in mind for both the Class F and Class H shuttlecraft.
In my little photomanip a few posts up I tried to make the filming miniature look more like the fullsize mock-up. This meant tweaking the positions of the vehicle's name and other markings. I also lowered the vehicle closer to the deck. You can also note the different hatch windows which subtly help distinguish the Class H ship from the Class F. And, of course, I changed the marking from Galileo to Copernicus NCC-1701/3.
The Class H will also have some other tweakings to distinguish it: a slightly different impulse engine design, different hatch windows and the internal arrangement will be somewhat altered. However, the size of the ship will remain exatly the same.
Can you make 1701/3 the Columbus, or at least say that the TAS-era Copernicus replaced TOS Columbus as 1701/3? It would mesh what you are doing with the list of shuttlecraft I wrote for the cross section, and the whole alphabetic naming scheme presented there. Not that it matters, but I'm such a continuity freak you know... 
I'm at odds here because FourMadMen made his Copernicus NCC-1701/3 and I helped him with the script for his cgi shuttlecraft. We'll see. (-: Not that it really matters, but upon seeing a few minutes of TFF being aired a week or so ago I noticed that that shuttlecraft Copernicus (no, it wasn't the Galileo 5) also happened to be 1701/3.
I'd have to double-check the Concordance to be certain, but I'm pretty sure the Columbus was NCC-1701/2, rather than /3.
FWIW, a search on that number turns up a whole range of references to Columbus, including:
http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Federation_shuttlecraft
and
http://www.lcarscom.net/fsd/operations/1701-shuttlebay.html
Hope this helps!
Best,
Alex
