Pros and cons of Franz Joseph's plans

Discussion in 'Fan Art' started by TIN_MAN, Feb 7, 2009.

  1. Praetor

    Praetor Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2004
    Location:
    The fine line between continuity and fanwank.
    I must say I like the less FJ-friendly one, since it seems more true to the actual sets. :cool:
     
  2. Cary L. Brown

    Cary L. Brown Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Location:
    Austin, Texas
    Lots of people are visiting... but there are few comments needing to be made. You're doing a fine job of what you're trying to do here. :)
     
  3. TIN_MAN

    TIN_MAN Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2007
    ^^ Thanks, I appreciate the compliment, especially coming from one as talented as yourself Cary! :techman:


    P.S. The more I think about it, the more I like the Idea of using a larger scale, this would fix a multitude of 'sins' in FJ's plans, without necessarily changing alot? In one fowl swoop we would get higher deck headroom, wider hallways and bathrooms, and extra length in the secondary hull for deeper deflector rings, etc. etc. What do you think?
     
    Last edited: Jun 1, 2009
  4. Vance

    Vance Vice Admiral In Memoriam

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2005
    Location:
    Colorado Springs
    The 947' reference is on screen, clear as day, in "Enterprise Incident". I really, really don't like upscaling, particularly just to include things that all of us know are solid Hollywoodisms (such as the 14' deck heights, etc.)

    I don't mind corrections to FJ's work, it's not gospel, but keep in mind there's a lot of things in the show that simply isn't physically possible or sensical. People have died, painfully, trying to model the external and internals of the shuttles... :)
     
  5. TIN_MAN

    TIN_MAN Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2007
    Oh, I agree completly, that's why I've made such a point to respect FJ's work as much as possible, because he did such a great job of "real-izing" the ship! But I think in regards to the things I mentioned, we might find further "happy mediums" between what we saw onscreen and what will fit in with FJ's overall plans, if we assume a slightly larger scale? I know 947' is "canon" an all, but as you say yourself, strict adherance to onscreen evidence leads to all kinds of headachs. I'm not talking 14' high decks here, just say, maybe 9' or 10' at most? Besides Warped9 has done a pretty good job of reconciling the shuttle interior/exterior and he did it by assuming a slightly larger exterior, so why not do the same for the mothership?
     
    Last edited: Jun 2, 2009
  6. Cary L. Brown

    Cary L. Brown Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Location:
    Austin, Texas
    Hmmm... what do I think?

    Well, I think that if, as you go through the process of trying to make everything from FJ fit, practically, and if it doesn't... the least important element is the little "scale" on each page, or the numbers in one little chart.

    If FJ had today's tools, it's not unlikely that he might have caught "issues" that he missed with the limits he was working under.

    In other words... if it works as-is, leave it as-is. But if it doesn't work... change it 'til it does.

    If it's really your call, but I wouldn't change size "just for the heck of it." Do it because you need to, and nobody ought to have any issue with it. Do it "just because" and I suspect most of us would object. Anyway, that's my take.
     
  7. TIN_MAN

    TIN_MAN Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2007
    Gotcha, actually it was your thread Cary, that got me to re-evaluate this whole scale issue. I like the way you let the visual evidence guide your estimate of scale based on a "best fit", instead of insisting on an either/or scenario between 947' and 1080', and thats all I'm considering here. We know FJ was trying to work within the "official" scale, but who's to say he might not have prefered to use a larger scale if he felt he had had the freedom to do so? As far as this threads "mission statment" goes, one thing I learned upstream (with lots of help from everyone :techman:) is that if we really want to fit FJ's innards into MJ's exterior (11' model contours) particularly in areas like the 8 -11 decks, then upping the scale would actually be simpler than trying to scrunch everything together and ending up with an unholy mess? And there are other things to consider, but if this thread continues to have life left in it, then we can get into these and other things as we go along, we'll see.
     
    Last edited: Jun 2, 2009
  8. Vance

    Vance Vice Admiral In Memoriam

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2005
    Location:
    Colorado Springs
    Well, I think people FORGET how big a 947' long ship really is. To say nothing of how deep, etc, it is. Rather than try to squeeze in too much, I would think that it would make more sense to drop things like the swimming pool, etc, which aren't really that needed (and not on screen anyway) to make other pieces fit more sensibly.
     
  9. TIN_MAN

    TIN_MAN Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2007
    It would, if I were trying to reinvent the wheel here, but I'm trying to work with what weve got, and avoid what I call the "cascade effect" where one change leads to another, and then another etc. until, the next thing you know, you've got a whole new set of deck plans! The whole point of my take on this all along, has been to stay true to FJ's basic design, and work within those limits, while trying to bring it more inline with what we saw on screen. So far, I think I've been able to do that, and while I'm basicaly satisfied with where things stand now, I do see possible avenues for further refinement, and one of these is tweaking the scale. Given the choice between "recalibrating" the scale or wholesale redesign of FJ's plans, I'll take the lesser of the two evils. :)
     
  10. Cary L. Brown

    Cary L. Brown Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Location:
    Austin, Texas
    There's certainly some truth in that statement, going both ways. That is to say, 947' may be larger (and able to hold more) than some people might thing when they look at the ship on-screen. But by the same measure, I think that some people over estimate just how large that is. 947', or 1080', or 1067'... given the configuration of this ship (which is, after all, mostly open volume) isn't really all that large. Especially when you remember that the ship is, ultimately, a MACHINE, not a Hilton.

    I've discovered, for instance, that even with my "upscaling," the ship doesn't have sufficient space for private cabins for everyone, or even "two-up" cabins... four-to-a-room cabins for the lower-ranks is required in this case.

    Now, FJ was obligated to work under GR's dictates, so he had to make more of the ship available for cabin-space than I think is remotely reasonable (making the ship the "flying Hilton"). I don't blame him for that, by the way. And since Tin Man is applying FJ's deck layouts (mostly) here, he is
    effectively obliged to at least try to follow that lead. To me, I think that at better than half of the ship's volume should be WORKING space or mechanical space. I think FJ's ship was maybe 1/4 non-residential? Which begs the question... what did all those people DO, since there was almost no place for 430 people (143 per shift, plus the captain) to WORK. There must've been a lot of "study at home" work and Ebay business being done on that ship. ;)
     
  11. Vance

    Vance Vice Admiral In Memoriam

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2005
    Location:
    Colorado Springs
    Well, the command staff seemed to have their cabins double as their offices (not unusual, really) , so that explains some of it. The crew SHOULD be double-bunking, though, but I'm not sure where you could nix crew quarters to double in the saucer without going farther from FJ's plans.
     
  12. Captain Robert April

    Captain Robert April Vice Admiral Admiral

    Well, kinda.

    The graphics comparing the Enterprise and the D-7 do have a little scale present, but there are no clearly defined callouts, like the famous 3-view of the ship itself. And it's all illegible on screen anyway, so there's wiggle room either way you go.
     
  13. Shaw

    Shaw Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2007
    Location:
    Twin Cities
    Here is the thing, and it shouldn't be over looked, those diagrams seen in The Enterprise Incident (which aired on September 27, 1968) were already publicly available in TMoST (first printing was in September 1968). Odds are that anyone who bought a copy in September, October, November or December would have been familiar enough with the diagrams in TMoST so as to recognize them in the second airing of The Enterprise Incident on December 27, 1968.

    Had the on screen diagram not been publicly available during the show's original run, then I would agree about wiggle room... but in this case, no matter how poorly they appeared on screen, people had access to very clear versions at the same time to examine more closely.
     
  14. Captain Robert April

    Captain Robert April Vice Admiral Admiral

    Good point; I'd forgotten about the book already being out by that point.