Apologies if these links have been posted before, but I just came across these images today and thought they might be of interest: Photos from the 1991-92 Ed Miarecki restoration of the 11-foot U.S.S. Enterprise studio model. There has been endless debate about some of the choices Ed made during the restoration process--and I hope we can all behave like adults instead of petulant children if this thread reopens that debate--but I find these images endlessly fascinating. Aspiring Enterprise modelers will definitely want to pour over these images for valuable hints on how to build the Gray Lady. When you're done gazing at the Enterprise photos, you should also check out Ed's other Trek-related restoration projects, including the original Klingon battlecruiser and Tholian/Aurora models.
Thank you very much, Prof. M, for bringing these to our attention. I for one, have never seen these. I'd still love to see the original color Smithsonian photos when the Big E first arrived. All I've ever seen are black and white. You know damn well there is probably a file drawer of pictures somewhere still waiting to see the light of day. The Smithsonian botched their restorations, I think Ed did a really good job, but was a bit too heavy on the weathering effects. A few color pictures have surfaced over the last few years of the production filiming model that does show a good deal of weathering, but not to the extent to which Ed went. I do think Ed's restoration was probably the best of the various attempts, but still a little heavy on the weathering. Ultimately, The Big E's current paintjob looks like whores makeup so I don't even want to talk about that topic. Thanks for sharing! Q2UnME
Beautiful shots... One thing that immediately lept out at me from that set of images is that NONE of the various drawing-sets I've seen have gotten the "teardrop" B/C-deck superstructure shape right. It's commonly portrayed as being either much more rounded, or much "sharper" at the aft tip, but I don't think I've seen ANY that had the nearly -straight-edged appearance I see there. That said... I'm happy with my own shape (which is not identical to ANY of the drawings, nor to this, it seems), as I've based it on a mathematically-driven form (the ubiquitous "conic form-factor" which I've used so frequently throughout this design). But that does sort of drive home that my choice (not to match Sinclair, or Casimiro, or any of the other references I've seen, in that detail) was a reasonable choice.
Well, not "2x4's" but certainly wooden beams. No indication from those images of the actual size of those beams, though I'm pretty sure we know the real numbers. Wood is actually a really, really good construction material, so I have zero problem with using it in this sort of application. In fact, when I do vac-form models, I almost always construct a wooden internal structure (using, mainly, model-aircraft plywood) and then just use the vac-form as a skin on top of that skeleton. You can use aluminum or other materials for this sort of thing, but it's actually pretty hard to beat good ol' wood for strength-to-weight ratio and ease of use.
Heh I know it probably isn't literal 2x4's, I was using the term in the more generic sense. It was just funny to see the reveal. I did a lot of wood working back in the day, so indeed I know how strong that can be.
They're also quite solid, which is why the wiring for the warp nacelle Christmas tree lights had to be snaked up the inboard side of the starboard pylon and the outboard side of the port pylon. You can just barely glimpse this wiring in certain shots of the 11-footer, such as this one. The same problem existed with the lighting effects for the saucer. Those wires were snaked up the port side of the interconnecting pylon.