Water slides.
Pros and cons of Franz Joseph's plans
- Thread starter TIN_MAN
- Start date
Water slides.
Certainly not standard turbolifts, but there'd have to be some sort of conveyance so technicians could get up there.
Gotta be something better than the staircase from Hell that FJ put in his plans.
Incidentally, with all these references to the Writer's Guide regarding Engineering, it should be noted that the Writer's Guide actually says nothing about where Engineering is, nor is it very specific about the way the engines work. All those references in TMoST are found ONLY in TMoST.
Gotta be something better than the staircase from Hell that FJ put in his plans.
Incidentally, with all these references to the Writer's Guide regarding Engineering, it should be noted that the Writer's Guide actually says nothing about where Engineering is, nor is it very specific about the way the engines work. All those references in TMoST are found ONLY in TMoST.
^^What about an area where there is no gravity control so that the specialists can float up or down without the need for a ladder, staircase, etc.? Kind of like the are on the NX Enterprise that had no gravity, if only for a few meters.
Ya - non-standard - considering they'd be on a slant, and we'd all be huddled into one corner for the ride LOL
You know, I don't think I've ever seen a copy of the actual writer's guide. Is there one online?
Of course!
Oberth class turbolifts!!
LOL well that would explain the swept-strut design for the refit: Tying the waterslides and the swimming pool together.
FalTorPan,
Actually, on the way home I realized I might have put my foot in it by suggesting you host someone else's work... without asking you about it first. It was a well intentioned suggestion, and I'm glad I didn't step-on-your-toes, so to speak.
And thank you for letting me re-host the images. Yes, I certainly will leave the logos intact. It gets kind of confusing when and when it is not appropriate to use someone else's stuff, and what they would or would not like you to do with it.
Sorry that you're so busy. A lot of that going around. An inoculation is needed. Preferably one that mixes well with Scotch whiskey.
But nothing's getting uploaded to Photobucket today: I'm beat, out of time, and not up to struggling with that SLOOOWWWW interface. Plus, I really want to replace all those resized images, I just don't know if the old links will be broken.
I have it on good authority that those tubes in the nacelle pylons are multipurpose: access ladder, turbolift shaft, hot-and-cold running antimatter tap, waste disposal, water main, and laundry. Scotty really hates it when people play with the buttons while he's up in there.
I'm up for hosting other people's work. I just don't have time to make a lot of updates on the fly. I guess the eternity since I last updated the site speaks to that fact!
[...]
First of all, thanks for asking. Some folks have not done so, and it cheeses me off. Those folks know who they are.
Anyway, feel free to host a few images from my site if you wish, provided the annotations remain intact. In other words, please keep the "trekplace.com" captions on them.
Have fun! I haven't had time to contribute much to this or any Trek-related discussion in quite some time, with my work schedule, ongoing MBA studies, and an upcoming wedding. I have a full plate -- I mean saucer section.
Actually, on the way home I realized I might have put my foot in it by suggesting you host someone else's work... without asking you about it first. It was a well intentioned suggestion, and I'm glad I didn't step-on-your-toes, so to speak.
And thank you for letting me re-host the images. Yes, I certainly will leave the logos intact. It gets kind of confusing when and when it is not appropriate to use someone else's stuff, and what they would or would not like you to do with it.
Sorry that you're so busy. A lot of that going around. An inoculation is needed. Preferably one that mixes well with Scotch whiskey.
But nothing's getting uploaded to Photobucket today: I'm beat, out of time, and not up to struggling with that SLOOOWWWW interface. Plus, I really want to replace all those resized images, I just don't know if the old links will be broken.
+++++++++
I have it on good authority that those tubes in the nacelle pylons are multipurpose: access ladder, turbolift shaft, hot-and-cold running antimatter tap, waste disposal, water main, and laundry. Scotty really hates it when people play with the buttons while he's up in there.
I was wondering if anyone had any observations about the nature of these two screen-caps from "The Day of the Dove", and the standard bridge (engineering?) display, before I plow in.
I have a long-winded Matt Jefferies post over in my thread:
http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=2719881&postcount=11
I have a long-winded Matt Jefferies post over in my thread:
http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=2719881&postcount=11
I actually had thought of an idea of having a small tube which would enable one to access the nacelles. Whether it was motored or you'd just climb up I didn't really get to that but it had to do with a "If I was the Producer/Director of TWOK" and that's how I would have offed Spock. Rather than die in the engineering room he'd climb up into the nacelle and get irradiated there (It was simply because I couldn't think of any purpose of that radiation chamber in the engineering room in TWOK as it wasn't there in TMP -- it just seemed that it was a room created solely for the purpose of Spock dying in it.). The idea would be to have a TV console that could allow the person in the nacelle to see people in the engineering room and vice versa. Of course this has no actual basis.
Still it would be useful to be able to access the nacelle.
Still it would be useful to be able to access the nacelle.
Oh, that's simple... one is intended to be an accurate visual representation of the ship, and the other is a purely symbolic representation (potentially with the various volumes representing the overall internal volume present in each "pressure compartment" rather than the actual physical shape).
I was wondering if anyone had any observations about the nature of these two screen-caps from "The Day of the Dove", and the standard bridge (engineering?) display, before I plow in.
I have a long-winded Matt Jefferies post over in my thread:
http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=2719881&postcount=11
I was wondering if anyone had any observations about the nature of these two screen-caps from "The Day of the Dove", and the standard bridge (engineering?) display, before I plow in.
I have a long-winded Matt Jefferies post over in my thread:
http://www.trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=2719881&postcount=11
As I understand it, the larger image here (from DotD) and the smallest one from the bridge display is actually the very same set-piece. It was pulled from the bridge set and re-colored for the close-up in DotD and, according to the Star Trek Sketchbook was lost on MJ's desk. It was evidently not re-installed on the bridge, and happened to become preserved. Somewhere i think I recall hearing it is the last surviving piece of the original bridge set.
I'd like to know if I'm wrong or not.
--Alex
Well, for starters, the images on the left are from "The Enterprise Incident"....
I agree completely, the original hull compartment digram as is is not much help. But Shaw has done a great job of extrapolating a workable design from it, which has tremendous utility in defining the layout of the ship. As such, he has certainly not wasted his time and energy, or ours!
Last edited:
Well, I think that one had to keep in mind the tools of the trade back then. Today I can create and then modify graphics I make quite easily. But in the 1960s everything was hand drawn, copies for staff were made with Ditto hand cranked copiers (which was still in use in many schools until the early 80s), and drawings for large graphics were done as negatives with colors added using colored jells.
Because of this, often the base graphic would only be made once... as is the case with the hull pressure compartment diagram, but the working piece in the display could be made a few times using other colors (and made at different sizes).
Below are some examples of unique graphics (and in the first two cases, my attempts at reconstructing them).
I have very large scale scans of the Day of the Dove and The Enterprise Incident graphics to work from (plus The Enterprise Incident graphics were hitting the book shelves about the same week that the original episode aired in TMoST), but I had to attempt to figure out from screen grabs what was happening on the turbolift graphic (so I used the DoD graphics elements where I wasn't sure).
So what does all that mean?
Well, I think that knowing how hard it was to put any of this together back then is important... if for no other reason than realizing how talented these people were. But also one has to recall the limits of the mediums being used for sharing some of the graphics seen in the writers guide. Copies handed out were no where near as nice as in the printing of TMoST. Those of us who were in school in the 60s and 70s and recall the handouts with blurry blue type that smelled of ammonia... fine details wouldn't have been transferable. Odds are that the drawings we look at of Jefferies today looked more like this to the writers of Star Trek back in the 1960s.
CRA,
Yes, that was my mistake, as almost all the other images I was working with here were labeled "DOD" or "Dove". I slipped up.
Dave,
Thanks for jumping in.
The point of me presenting these was not to attack their use as a pressure hull diagram. They are canon, they are labeled as "Hull Pressure Comp'ts", and I accept them as such. They are "coarse data" but I fully approve and appreciate Dave's great efforts to rehabilitate them.
The reason I, and presumably others (unlike Dave), have ignored these while they sat under our noses is that they appear to be so darn crude. The comparison to the display used in (thank you CRA) "The Enterprise Incident" shows that they could do better... just for a single script. But worse than crude, they are not merely abstract but inaccurate. Why this particular design was selected and continually reused is a pertinent question. After all, the Engineering Set continually changed, and not just in minor ways (such as Finney's wrench & table). Everything that wasn't nailed down -- and some things that were -- could be moved, replaced, upgraded, or deleted every few episodes. But these little graphics just kept hanging in. Who is continually changing Engineering? Every director that wanders in? Probably not. The guy in charge of sets & scenery? Yeah, that sounds more like it. Whoever it is the world of Trek is not set in stone for him.
Crudeness is understandable, but not in comparison to some other work on the show of this type.
Abstractness is understandable, but not inaccuracy. The top of the primary hull is highly inaccurate, the shrinking rather than expanding (moving forward) secondary hull is inaccurate, the pylons are massively thick. Not just abstract, inaccurate. Like 'never seen' the Pilot/Production design inaccurate.
I've wondered if the diagram doesn't represent an earlier design sketch, that was replaced by the more updated version... during production. Presumably its installation goes back to "The Cage", when the ship may have had half the volume or less (based on crew) and less decks. If so, those might be decks, not pressure hulls -- as originally conceived and perhaps used in filming the first Pilot). I wonder about that. Did the set construction go ahead with this diagram because they thought it was accurate? Was it just left there out of laxity or ineptitude? Because they thought we couldn't see it on tiny B&W TVs? Was it left because once it was broadcast changing it would bring letters of protest??? If so, apparently Engineering wasn't thought to be as noticible? Frankly, a lot of this doesn't make sense to me.
I just don't see MJ making this diagram, not after the final design was locked. Before, yes, after, no. So either it was based on concept sketches and done very early or its someone else's work (or I don't understand MJ). That's the question I am throwing up, whether I am off-base or not. In terms of the current discussion, this only has a bearing in that if MJ is not personally responsible for the DotD refurbishing then I would place less importance on the specific depiction for that episode (a "throwaway line" in graphic form, so to speak). But this is a more important question so that is being set aside. If I were as stubborn and meticulous as he has been described (standing in the middle of the set and yelling until a problem is fixed), these all would have been upgraded ASAP, particularly for the use in this episode.
What does everyone else think?
Yes, that was my mistake, as almost all the other images I was working with here were labeled "DOD" or "Dove". I slipped up.
+++++++++
Dave,
Thanks for jumping in.
The point of me presenting these was not to attack their use as a pressure hull diagram. They are canon, they are labeled as "Hull Pressure Comp'ts", and I accept them as such. They are "coarse data" but I fully approve and appreciate Dave's great efforts to rehabilitate them.
The reason I, and presumably others (unlike Dave), have ignored these while they sat under our noses is that they appear to be so darn crude. The comparison to the display used in (thank you CRA) "The Enterprise Incident" shows that they could do better... just for a single script. But worse than crude, they are not merely abstract but inaccurate. Why this particular design was selected and continually reused is a pertinent question. After all, the Engineering Set continually changed, and not just in minor ways (such as Finney's wrench & table). Everything that wasn't nailed down -- and some things that were -- could be moved, replaced, upgraded, or deleted every few episodes. But these little graphics just kept hanging in. Who is continually changing Engineering? Every director that wanders in? Probably not. The guy in charge of sets & scenery? Yeah, that sounds more like it. Whoever it is the world of Trek is not set in stone for him.
Crudeness is understandable, but not in comparison to some other work on the show of this type.
Abstractness is understandable, but not inaccuracy. The top of the primary hull is highly inaccurate, the shrinking rather than expanding (moving forward) secondary hull is inaccurate, the pylons are massively thick. Not just abstract, inaccurate. Like 'never seen' the Pilot/Production design inaccurate.
I've wondered if the diagram doesn't represent an earlier design sketch, that was replaced by the more updated version... during production. Presumably its installation goes back to "The Cage", when the ship may have had half the volume or less (based on crew) and less decks. If so, those might be decks, not pressure hulls -- as originally conceived and perhaps used in filming the first Pilot). I wonder about that. Did the set construction go ahead with this diagram because they thought it was accurate? Was it just left there out of laxity or ineptitude? Because they thought we couldn't see it on tiny B&W TVs? Was it left because once it was broadcast changing it would bring letters of protest??? If so, apparently Engineering wasn't thought to be as noticible? Frankly, a lot of this doesn't make sense to me.
I just don't see MJ making this diagram, not after the final design was locked. Before, yes, after, no. So either it was based on concept sketches and done very early or its someone else's work (or I don't understand MJ). That's the question I am throwing up, whether I am off-base or not. In terms of the current discussion, this only has a bearing in that if MJ is not personally responsible for the DotD refurbishing then I would place less importance on the specific depiction for that episode (a "throwaway line" in graphic form, so to speak). But this is a more important question so that is being set aside. If I were as stubborn and meticulous as he has been described (standing in the middle of the set and yelling until a problem is fixed), these all would have been upgraded ASAP, particularly for the use in this episode.
What does everyone else think?
Well, both graphics (turbolift and hull pressure compartments) were done very early as schematics diagrams rather than true depictions... mainly because when they were made for The Cage the models weren't built and the large scale plans for the models weren't finished yet. So where did the general outline for those diagrams come from? One need only look at the evolutionary sketches Jefferies made.
Does it matter that these graphics aren't hyper accurate? Depends on what you are using them for. Many of my own sketches aren't hyper accurate because I'm attempting to convey information that could be lost if I spent too much time and energy on pointless details. People don't always display the most accurate image when it's accuracy isn't a factor... even FJ was known for doing this same thing.
Given this graphic from FJ, would you think any less of him for a lack of hyper accuracy?
Jefferies was apparently fine with using and re-using this graphic over and over again for this type of information. If it seems odd to you or anyone else that anyone would do such a thing, I doubt that anything I could say will change that view. I could point out other real world examples (systems displays in airplanes... or the warning lights display of my mother's 1983 Mustang), but if you have it in your head that only hyper accurate will work, then that is all that will work for you. But can you imagine trying to reverse engineer an F/A-18 based on some systems display graphic that shows up in the cockpit?
For me, I can understand that a generalized graphic is meant for conveying generalized information and that a detailed graphic (that includes a scale measurement) should be treated in a very different way. And that is how I approach this stuff (both in Star Trek and in reading technical documents in the course of my work).
Similar threads
