Oberth Class – the missing link between Enterprise and Reliant

[Robert Comsol]

Maybe that wasn't a docking ring. Maybe it was a refueling hatch of some sort. I mean yes, it looks like it in the images, but I don't know. I like it being a smaller ship.

The size of the "circle" has the characteristics of an airlock / docking ring and the other outer hull markings (Starfleet insignia, red stripes on Engineering hull) look like a very good match.

The previous analysis of other fans made two suggestions for a 220m + ship based on the TNG screen cross-sections and the torn-open model of the Vico.

But anyway, we'd need some place on the ship to rationalize the bridge airlock seen in "The Naked Now". Unless you want to argue we didn't see the bow of Tsiolkovsky's slab the saucer sits on, the engineering hull looks like the only candidate for this kind of airlock or "emergency hatch".

I think the TNG (TV) size is 220m + but I still think we are also looking at a version only 120m in length, i.e. the Grissom and Copernicus (intended), the one at the end of ST VII (obviously) and maybe the Tsiolkovsky and some others, too.

In the size comparisons with Kirk's Enterprise the Oberth Class from TNG definitely looks too big, but then it's a good thing we never saw those ships next to one another in TNG.

Bob

 

[Dukhat]

I'm thinking it should be around 180 meters or so. That way there's no discrepancy between Robert's "TNG size" and "movie size."

 

[Praetor]

Seems too big now...

Maybe that wasn't a docking ring. Maybe it was a refueling hatch of some sort. I mean yes, it looks like it in the images, but I don't know. I like it being a smaller ship.

Alas, I'm pretty sure it has to be a docking port. We could choose to ignore it, but it appears identical to the one on the AMT/Ertl decal sheet for the Enterprise. But hang on, there's an out.

The previous analysis of other fans made two suggestions for a 220m + ship based on the TNG screen cross-sections and the torn-open model of the Vico.

Glad you brought that up. I was staring at my analysis and staring at this:

And something obvious came to mind.

Whoever added the decal to the original Grissom model during TNG probably also made the Vico model. That might very well be Mr. Jein. It seems almost like too much of a coincidence that the scale represented by this model and the scale I just backed into match up.

So it seems the modelling department believed in a larger size for the Oberth while the graphics department (as seen in the Vico cutaway) believed in a smaller size.

(Another tangent point comes to mind... the Vico, with her NAR designation, still has what we've always assumed to be the Starfleet arrowhead. Weird.)

But anyway, we'd need some place on the ship to rationalize the bridge airlock seen in "The Naked Now". Unless you want to argue we didn't see the bow of Tsiolkovsky's slab the saucer sits on, the engineering hull looks like the only candidate for this kind of airlock or "emergency hatch".

Yeah, that's a tough one. Reverend put a bridge in the bow of the pod, and rationalized there was a hidden hatch there - which is frankly as good an excuse as any. The problem with using the airlock hatch decal as seen is that the airlock as seen in "The Naked Now" doesn't quite match.

I think the TNG (TV) size is 220m + but I still think we are also looking at a version only 120m in length, i.e. the Grissom and Copernicus (intended), the one at the end of ST VII (obviously) and maybe the Tsiolkovsky and some others, too.

In the size comparisons with Kirk's Enterprise the Oberth Class from TNG definitely looks too big, but then it's a good thing we never saw those ships next to one another in TNG.

Devil's advocate here... why is it too big compared to the Constitution?

The "saucer" on the Oberth is a fairly tiny, four deck affair at the larger size. If the pylon underneath is largely uninhabitable, with machinery and cargo bays, and the pod itself is mostly one big equipment bay... she may be big but she doesn't really win in terms of volume. Plus, if she is this big, I'm reasonably certain a turbolift could comfortably fit down the pylons, making it not such a big deal to access the pod.

Plus, all we really have as far as intent is the "mid-size Federation science vessel" line from TSFS script, and the ambiguous "scout class vessel" exchange from the same. She's not as big as the Enterprise, so that could work for me as mid-sized.

I'm thinking it should be around 180 meters or so. That way there's no discrepancy between Robert's "TNG size" and "movie size."

I have to agree - the half-dozen sizes of bird-of-prey are bad enough. I'd rather find a happy medium.

We could, of course, simply ignore the airlock decal, or choose to believe that there's one there, but not be tied down to the 239 meter size.

Also, another thought occurs to me while staring at the design. Regarding the pod, the silvery details on top and front of the pod almost suggest to me that this silver element sits like a tank nested inside the structure located aft; almost like the aft structure is just a faring or housing for the silver tank thingy. Now, obviously the way the aft structure curves around the front doesn't make the silver part interchangeable (at least not easily) but it's certainly an interesting thought that maybe there's some big thing or collection of things in the silver tank that "actually" takes up most of the pod.

 

[Robert Comsol]

The problem with using the airlock hatch decal as seen is that the airlock as seen in "The Naked Now" doesn't quite match.

Bob

 

[Praetor]

I mean, the airlocks that belong to those decals are established as being circular things with half-circle doors. The one on the Tsiolkovsky was of a noticeably different shape. Of course, it's possible all Starfleet airlock hatch decals look the same.

If it's different, that actually does make my scaling above too big... and in fact makes it somewhat impossible to scale the airlock decal to the Enterprise.

 

[Robert Comsol]

The one on the Tsiolkovsky was of a noticeably different shape. Of course, it's possible all Starfleet airlock hatch decals look the same.

How can you be sure? We only saw that airlock from the inside.

Bob

 

[Dukhat]

The one on the Tsiolkovsky was of a noticeably different shape. Of course, it's possible all Starfleet airlock hatch decals look the same.

How can you be sure? We only saw that airlock from the inside.

Bob

That airlock was on the bridge, not the secondary hull, and it obviously was not meant for a shuttle to dock to it. It also doesn't correspond to any exterior part of the model, probably because no one knew which model would be used when that scene was filmed.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Seriously, who puts a door to space on the bridge of a starship? It isn't even a technically an airlock because it was just the one door.

 

[Robert Comsol]

That airlock was on the bridge, not the secondary hull, and it obviously was not meant for a shuttle to dock to it.

Assuming that all command bridges have to be in the center and at the top of any saucer your conclusion would seem correct.

However, if the saucer module (back to the original intention of this thread) was merely a planet landing capable mission module we might be looking at the possibility that the main bridge was located within the engineering pod.

The dialogue refers to this airlock as an "emergency hatch".

I agree this is emphasized what seem to be partition doors that don't move sideways but vertically up or down. While probably not standard procedure, I don't see why this emergency airlock could not be used for a docking maneuver should the need ever arise (this is not 2001 ).

As an emergency hatch it would definitely require rationalization.

Either as part of a landing saucer module (like on the Klingon BoP in ST IV) or, as Timo suggested, near the lowest part of the vessel to allow a (Hindenburg-style?) evacuation once the whole ship has landed.

Or the bridge is in the secondary hull and because it would take the bridge crew too long to climb to the detachable saucer module they have to put on EVA suits and abandon the bridge and the engineering pod in this fashion, hoping to be picked up by the saucer module.

I know, it sounds weird, but lifeboats are a no-go, IMHO. Can't exclude the possibility that the bridge crew abandons the ship before somebody realizes they didn't notify their crewmates in the saucer module - and up it blows along with the rest of the ship.

It also doesn't correspond to any exterior part of the model, probably because no one knew which model would be used when that scene was filmed.

But I believe "canon" demands we come up with a rationalization for the scene from "The Naked Now".

I think "ship of riddles" doesn't qualify, it's more like the "ship that puts us between rocks and hard places".

Bob

 

[Praetor]

I have always been inclined to thing the set builders didn't want to spend the cash to build an angled wall that would remotely match the exterior of the Tsiolkovsky for a one-off scene, and leave it at that.

 

[Dukhat]

However, if the saucer module (back to the original intention of this thread) was merely a planet landing capable mission module we might be looking at the possibility that the main bridge was located within the engineering pod.

I'm fairly certain that the dome in the center of the saucer is supposed to be the bridge, just like every other known Starfleet starship.

But I believe "canon" demands we come up with a rationalization for the scene from "The Naked Now".

The bridge airlock was a script necessity, nothing more.

 

[blssdwlf]

The original VFX model (Grissom) had an overall length of 120 meters according to its creators. That it was "upscaled" for TNG is the logical conclusion of cross-sections established during TNG.
But even if we approached the size in the Thermian way, than this would be at least proof it was "downscaled".

While watching "The Naked Now" I noticed this interesting scaling bit. The Tchaikovsky(sp) is behind the E-D in this shot so that makes this particular TNG Grissom fairly big. I wonder if the TNG New FX version did the same thing?

 

[Robert Comsol]

Good catch! Yes, TNG-R did the same thing, thus we are indeed looking at a Tsiolkovsky far bigger than just 120 meters.

I think that tells us that right from the start of TNG they went for the bigger version.

Did we have any details about the size of this stellar fragment in the episode?
With a rough length same as the small Grissom the E-D could have probably just used phasers to vaporize it?

Bob

 

[Praetor]

Damn. Good find. The D is a great resource since her sizing was so well planned out, and Ten-Forward aside, works pretty well. In a way, that image almost invalidates the scale diagram made for TNG production entirely.

I wonder, though, if this is the only instance on TNG and later where the Oberth is thus scaled?

 

[SWHouston]

It's just a personal preference, but...
I've always liked the Constellation Class,
Always thought of it as being like a 4WD,
You may not use it often, but it's there if you need it.

 

[Maurice]

The original VFX model (Grissom) had an overall length of 120 meters according to its creators. That it was "upscaled" for TNG is the logical conclusion of cross-sections established during TNG.
But even if we approached the size in the Thermian way, than this would be at least proof it was "downscaled".

While watching "The Naked Now" I noticed this interesting scaling bit. The Tchaikovsky(sp) is behind the E-D in this shot so that makes this particular TNG Grissom fairly big. I wonder if the TNG New FX version did the same thing?

The remastered shot is pretty close in terms of scale.

 

[Dukhat]

At that scale, it would make the Tsiolkovsky about as large as the Constitution class, which was what Praetor extrapolated by using the later-added Connie docking port decal as scale. I still don't think the ship was supposed to be that large however; nor do I think it was ever supposed to be as small as 120 meters.

 

[Praetor]

I think part of the beauty of Reverend's 150 meter size is the compromise of it. She's small enough to still be a good degree smaller than the Enterprise, but is not so implausibly tiny. I still struggle a bit with fitting 80 people in her, though.

I went through my files, and found that long ago I had began a revamp of the MSD I helped LCARS24 do at the 150 meter size.



One of the problems with the 120 meter size is how inflexible it makes deck placement; the saucer gives you exactly room for two decks plus the dome, and the horizontal strut below isn't quite tall enough to be a full deck. At the 150 meter size, at least, you have wiggle room in the saucer, can get a full deck out of the horizontal strut, and have wiggle room in the pod, too.

In my mind, the Oberth probably initially mounted a highly automated reactor in the secondary hull, later replaced in more modern units by a warp core. Alternatively, the small area behind the saucer could have mounted a reactor, and the pod could have remained independent until the restrictions forced 24th century engineers to put a warp core down there.

The advantage of the larger ship, of course, is that the pylons are bigger and actually allow for better travel between the sections. Plus, the 80 people wouldn't seem so cramped. When I found the above, I also found a version of it I had began scaling to the wrecked Vico model, basically doubling the decks.

I think overall, while "The Naked Now," the docking port decal, and the wrecked Vico point us to a larger ship, overall evidence - particularly the ship seen in "Generations" pushes us back down to the smaller size bracket. Stretching it to 150, though not the original intention, allows us the wiggle room we need to make her plausible.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

You could just do yourself a favor and imagine there are actually TWO completely different starships that just happen to look very similar and this is all just a cosmic coincidence.

 

[Praetor]

Would that be the "Klingon Method"? Or the "Bird of Prey Paradigm"?

I honestly think 150 meters works just dandy.