So, I made this.
- Thread starter Professor Moriarty
- Start date
To feel consistent with TOS, I suggest replacing the glass doors with something based on the brig force field. Also, the TMP cargo pods just seem out of place to me. They take me right out of the immersive reality you are trying so hard to create, mainly because they came along ten years later, but also because Probert once said he never liked or wanted them and that he had wanted something more honeycomb shaped to allow better space utilization. From a treknical perspective I always rationalized that they were something unique to an unfinished ship - dummy ballast or some such. At least until they showed up in TWoK.
I also thought your one, big, centered door made more sense than two. Two doors leave ingress/egress operations far to starboard and port - where the nacelles enter. The centered door keeps all that along the centerline and would allow you to at least imagine those nacelle pylons show up in some way back there.
I also thought your one, big, centered door made more sense than two. Two doors leave ingress/egress operations far to starboard and port - where the nacelles enter. The centered door keeps all that along the centerline and would allow you to at least imagine those nacelle pylons show up in some way back there.
Last edited:
The paired set of cargo doors and their side placement avoid the warp drive conduits that come together in the center.
TOS force field doors… hmmm!
Never heard the storage unit story before. I do agree with Probert though; I always thought they looked a bit odd.
TOS force field doors… hmmm!
Never heard the storage unit story before. I do agree with Probert though; I always thought they looked a bit odd.
They re-purposed the cargo shape from Nogura's office walls and windows from the original Phase II setup. If I remember right.
I'm curious, why did you rescale the ship? I thought your flight deck fit in it based on your previous video...
Since you've adapted the new FX approach of allowing the shuttle to take off and fly out on it's own power from within the ship wouldn't a blast shield or deflector be better back there instead of two transparent sets of doors?
The renders do look good
I rescaled the ship because if the shuttlecraft really is 24 feet long (said by Kirk onscreen in an episode, which is canon as you can get) and not 21 feet long (the length of the 3/4-scale real world studio prop, which is also the size that the model was created at) then it throws off the scale of everything else in the hangar deck. I’m not gonna repeat the whole math exercise I did earlier, but scaling up the hangar by a factor of 24÷21 makes things a bit more roomy. And no, the previous hangar model did not fit in the secondary hull without putting the wall (where the cargo doors are located) way in front of where the warp nacelle pylons enter the hull.
I agree, it makes no sense to have glass doors (or even force field doors) if shuttles regularly blast off. Perhaps we should just ignore that previous video of mine showing the Galileo II hovering and then jetting off; maybe shuttles are catapulted off the ship. As for Decker though, I think we can agree that him stealing a shuttlecraft was beyond the pale; anything that he did during that escape would be something extraordinary.
I agree, it makes no sense to have glass doors (or even force field doors) if shuttles regularly blast off. Perhaps we should just ignore that previous video of mine showing the Galileo II hovering and then jetting off; maybe shuttles are catapulted off the ship. As for Decker though, I think we can agree that him stealing a shuttlecraft was beyond the pale; anything that he did during that escape would be something extraordinary.
I like the use of the TMP containers, since I'm a sucker for anything that ties together the different eras of Trek (I also like the little Class F easter egg in the TMP: DE). The glass doors feel atypical, though. My first thought would simply be to have one or both of them open, but it doesn't fit with the fact that in TOS, the shuttlebay is explicitly depressurized when the door is open (no atmosphere forcefield here). On the other hand, the containers would certainly be airtight, since we see them towed through open space, so maybe it wouldn't matter to leave the door open. Or I can just satisfy myself that I know they're there, since I've seen these pictures.
Last edited:
Ohh I remember now!
What if you kept the backwall as you have it now and when Decker blasts off he scorches the paint and blows out one of the glass doors? It would certainly be "action-y"
Oof. Even in his state of mind, I don’t think Decker would do something that he knew would cause harm to the Enterprise.
Having said that, I agree that the glass doors just don’t fit the TOS aesthetic, and I’m not keen on brig-style forcefield doors, either. And while I agree that the containers are probably airtight, I would also imagine that there has to be some sort of automatic interlock to prevent the main shuttle bay clamshell doors from opening while any cargo doors are open, because humans working in the cargo bay are not airtight! I still want to give the audience a sneak peek of the cargo bay, though.
Having said that, I agree that the glass doors just don’t fit the TOS aesthetic, and I’m not keen on brig-style forcefield doors, either. And while I agree that the containers are probably airtight, I would also imagine that there has to be some sort of automatic interlock to prevent the main shuttle bay clamshell doors from opening while any cargo doors are open, because humans working in the cargo bay are not airtight! I still want to give the audience a sneak peek of the cargo bay, though.
For @aridas sofia
I'm not showing it in the model because it will never be visible, but the warp plasma conduits (or whatever the TOS name for these pipes are) would intrude on space for the cargo doors no matter where they are placed, so my reasoning is that they make a 45 degree turn when they enter the hull and meet in the center of the hull right behind the transverse observation deck.
It's nearly impossible to see at all, but just to make sure everything would fit I did model an enclosure for the warp plasma conduits to pipe them forward to the engineering area that is forward of the cargo bay. This arrangement allows the cargo bay to have an uninterrupted lower deck area.
For @blssdwlf
I'm going to move the pair of conduits to the front side of each pylon to give the observation deck a little more room. But as you can see, even with shortening the geometric length of the hangar deck the pylons still intrude a bit into the volume of space taken up by the flight deck. (Before I did the shortening, the back wall of the flight deck was just about even with the leading edge of each warp nacelle pylon.)
I'm not showing it in the model because it will never be visible, but the warp plasma conduits (or whatever the TOS name for these pipes are) would intrude on space for the cargo doors no matter where they are placed, so my reasoning is that they make a 45 degree turn when they enter the hull and meet in the center of the hull right behind the transverse observation deck.
It's nearly impossible to see at all, but just to make sure everything would fit I did model an enclosure for the warp plasma conduits to pipe them forward to the engineering area that is forward of the cargo bay. This arrangement allows the cargo bay to have an uninterrupted lower deck area.
For @blssdwlf
I'm going to move the pair of conduits to the front side of each pylon to give the observation deck a little more room. But as you can see, even with shortening the geometric length of the hangar deck the pylons still intrude a bit into the volume of space taken up by the flight deck. (Before I did the shortening, the back wall of the flight deck was just about even with the leading edge of each warp nacelle pylon.)
Last edited:
Thanks for the visuals @Professor Moriarty
That's a good option given the tight space you've got there. The only other option is to remove the observation room on the backwall but that'd probably be a ton of work on your part so I think your idea to shift your power conduits forward makes the most sense.On the cargo containers... what if you made it two decks tall? (Extend it down 1 deck.) And leave the elevator opening be able to see the cargo containers below? Just a thought...
The shuttle maintenance and storage bay (and some additional cargo space) is one deck below the main cargo bay.
Thicken that front wall and use it as a reinforced bulkhead to help anchor the struts. Aircraft wings have internal members called spars that carry lift loads to the fuselage and they often are mounted to a reinforced bulkhead in the fuselage. IOW, the nacelles [struts] are not fence posts.
edit: bold
edit: bold
Last edited:
I always assumed the larger, darker panels on the engineering hull around the pylon and neck connections (and the deflector dish) represented that those areas were reinforced somehow compared to the rest of the hull. Since that detail isn't on the TOS version, you could also interpret the new support system being something added during the rebuild.
Last edited:
That was the other reason to upscale to 1080 feet. I’ve started working on the interiors of the observation deck, and you’ll be able to see support spars in there. The additional space avoids having to make those spars intrude into the hangar deck volume. 
(Edited to correct stupid spelling mistake. Stupid fat thumbs!)
(Edited to correct stupid spelling mistake. Stupid fat thumbs!)
Last edited:
Because the back wall looks very plain without it.
That was a rhetorical question.
Similar threads
