The Excelsior - uncovering the design

Discussion in 'Trek Tech' started by yotsuya, Mar 28, 2021.

  1. Mytran

    Mytran Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2009
    Location:
    North Wales
    Good thoughts.
    Incidentally I didn't mean to be mysterious, I just didn't have time to complete my post this morning!

    Basically, I postulate that the first wave of Starship (AKA Constitution) Class ships had much thinner saucers., about one deck thick. However, as they achieved higher and higher speeds the outer half of the saucers began to fracture. The overall shape was still fine for optimal warp geometry, it just needed to be stronger - so an array of structural integrity boosters was installed around the rim. These were in turn covered up by standard hull plating, which was blended into the existing shape of the hull.
    The atmospheric aerodynamics of a separated saucer were just a bonus! :techman:
    Future builds of this class simply retained what worked.
    [​IMG]
     
  2. yotsuya

    yotsuya Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2008
    That is logical. Makes sense to me. I was just comparing it to the NX (which has a 1 deck thick edge) and trying to think of a reason for the design change that fit with the undercut.
     
  3. Peregrinus

    Peregrinus Lieutenant Junior Grade Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2006
    Location:
    Somewhere on the Salish Sea
    And there's also Matt's early section view, which predated the building of the filming miniature, that show the lower portion of the saucer rim having a beveled edge that ended up not being on the filming miniature.

    [​IMG]

    Those two outer compartments are a good candidate for sensors or machinery. Everything between those and the corridor wouldn't be there (or, at least, nowhere near full ceiling height).
     
    CaptChris42 likes this.
  4. publiusr

    publiusr Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Location:
    publiusr
    I might have a collider coil a long the rim of the saucer. Maybe a sump or fluid handling.
     
  5. publiusr

    publiusr Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Location:
    publiusr
    I don't know if I have asked this before---but is there a smaller deflector assembly or something in some drawings of Excelsiors belly?
     
    Last edited: Oct 22, 2023
  6. yotsuya

    yotsuya Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2008
    Not any I've seen.
     
  7. CaptChris42

    CaptChris42 Lieutenant Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2023
    Location:
    UK, Leicestershire
    I assume they got commissioned in a number of 'spurts' and batches. With the majority of the 42000 to 45000 ones being launched in the 2330s, maybe? (like with the USS Hokkaido and the last run of Renaissance class ships) Still, we know registries do not match one to one with commissioning order, always.

    Also, what sources confirmed USS Sarek as an Excelsior? Beta, Alpha, or otherwise?

    And I'll have more to say on that 'Measure of a Man' screen, shortly, too...
     
    Dukhat likes this.
  8. David cgc

    David cgc Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2002
    Location:
    Florida
    yotsuya and CaptChris42 like this.
  9. yotsuya

    yotsuya Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2008
    The only thing I'd suggest is that we use Mk I, Mk II, and Mk III to refer to the 3 versions of the model. The Jein model (and its subsequent CG copy) was a variation on the Mk II and the differences are not easy to see on screen. Mk I is the original Star Trek III and season 1 and 2 of TNG. Mk II is the TUC version and the Melbourn and Jein's copy for Flashback. Mk III is the Ent B and Lakota. It was never used for any other ships that I am aware of. I don't even know of a use of the stock footages from its two appearances. I consider them the same ship renamed. Most of the ships are going to be Mk II, especially since most were during the Dominion War and were either Jein's model or it's CG copy.
     
  10. publiusr

    publiusr Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Location:
    publiusr
    Any plans to draw Jein's model?
     
  11. Dukhat

    Dukhat Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    Location:
    Maryland, USA
    Wasn't the Hood both a Mk I (physical model) and a Mk II (CGI model)?
     
    CaptChris42 likes this.
  12. Ithekro

    Ithekro Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Location:
    Republic of California
    Upgraded for the Dominion War maybe?
     
  13. Dukhat

    Dukhat Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    Location:
    Maryland, USA
    I guess that's as good a reason as any. Seems odd that it would take so long for that upgrade to happen, though.
     
  14. yotsuya

    yotsuya Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2008
    No. Jein was trying to copy the studio model (according to Gary Kerr, he was working from photos - the few that ILM had) and the only two significant detail differences are the height of the secondary hull and the saucer grid (which impacts the RCS and phaser placement). So I consider those like TOS using the AMT kit or the 33 inch or swapping back and forth between pilot and series shots. I'm drawing the main studio models, not all the various ones. I don't have enough pictures of Jein's model in any case. Or I should say models because he made a number of unilluminated versions that he sold.
     
    publiusr likes this.
  15. 137th Gebirg

    137th Gebirg Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2000
    Location:
    Go Lick The World!
    IIRC, the height of the 2H wasn't an issue, so much as the width of it. Eaglemoss' front-view schematics of the Jein-E vs the E-B (modded original) show the differences petty clearly. There were other small things but the 2H was the most obvious:
    Jein-E.png
    E-B.png

    What I don't understand is why Jein didn't use the original NX-2000 build photos from TSFS, that clearly showed the proper 2H width. These would have been available at the time:
    excelsior2-935835152.jpg
     
    saddestmoon, USS Firefly and publiusr like this.
  16. Rekkert

    Rekkert Fleet Captain Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2016
    Location:
    Buenos Aires, Argentina
    Width was certainly also an inssue, but the height of the secondary hull is the bigger one, notice how taller it is in relation to the neck on the original model. Also, both Eaglemoss models are terrible, they have details from both versions mixed lol

    In another difference, I hate how short (front to back) the neck is on the 3 footer, there's a lot of overhang on the impulse engines which looks really bad in comparison to the 7.5 footer.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
    saddestmoon likes this.
  17. publiusr

    publiusr Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Location:
    publiusr
    It looks like the bridge is directly over the lower sensor dome there...I prefer that.

    Other drawings have it back a bit--like the ENT-D bridge.

    Also, the secondary hull is supposed to be more bowl shaped as viewed from the front--though it being "pinched" looks okay.
     
  18. yotsuya

    yotsuya Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2008
    Those side view photos prove my point. It's the height of the secondary hull. The Eaglemoss schematics are way off. Don't trust them. And those were the photos that Greg Jein was going from. But those photos are full of perspective issues. It took a lot more photos for me to rectify all those issues, and those photos weren't available publicly until 2006 or later.
     
    publiusr likes this.
  19. 137th Gebirg

    137th Gebirg Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2000
    Location:
    Go Lick The World!
    Aw, hell, I remember seeing those old photos going back to the olden days of Starlog, Cinefex and/or Cinefantastique. Can’t remember which one specifically, but they were certainly released to the public a lot earlier than 2006! :lol: In any case, Greg Jein was not “the public” and would have, at the very least, had access to production stills like those to get a good idea of how the original was built, even if he was unable to view it in-person to take proper measurements and source photos of his own, which seemed to be the case.

    As for the narrowness of the Jein 2H, I agree that there is some perspective distortion with the PH going back to the nacelles, but that will not at all change the relative width of the 2H, since it’s amidships and will have the least amount of distortion. That’s just the way cameras work, either CG or IRL. One only needs to look at the many photos taken at the Christie’s auction where the miniatures (both of them) were sold off. The differences in the shapes of the 2H were very starkly visible. The poor “strong back” of the Jein model was also horribly warped (pun not intended), with the upper surface separating from the main body at the middle. The nacelles were sagging badly and I think the PH was also starting to tilt downward as well. Too much weight was imposed on the weak armature infrastructure (if it even had one). It was quite sad to see.
     
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2023
    saddestmoon likes this.
  20. blssdwlf

    blssdwlf Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    I think I missed the post but what episode(s) does Jein's 2H appear in?