TOS Class F...
- Thread starter Warped9
- Start date
In their case I'm just assuming they swing open like a conventional door given there isn't any room for them to slide open to.
I guess I could settle for still renders ;D haha
It's true that swinging doors were not unknown in TOS - notably in "The Menagerie" and "Court Martial." It's good to know that this often-forgotten element of TOS design can be highlighted here.
It's true that swinging doors were not unknown in TOS - notably in "The Menagerie" and "Court Martial." It's good to know that this often-forgotten element of TOS design can be highlighted here.
Some might be wondering what the differences are between the Class F and the Class H. And by differences I'm referring to size. They might also be wondering why I'm using the H to build the hangar facilities around.
The H is a bit larger than the F. And I do mean only a bit. Given that the H is larger it made sense (to mean) to build aroud it because then wherever the H can fit the F will will fit even better.
The H sprang from the idea of the shuttlecraft seen in TAS' "Slaver Weapon" episode. That design (which I have modeled a "realistic" version of) was unlike any shuttlecraft design seen in TOS (of which we only saw the one). While I did work up a more "real" version of the TAS design I couldn't help but think of what TOS might have managed to do if given the chance. It struck me that they wouldn't have strayed too far from what they already had (indeed they most likely would have simply used what they already had). But as a thought exercise I wondered what could be.
So using the familiar Class H as the template I toyed with what could be changed and remain in the realm of what TOS could have done with a little extra time and money. Another important parameter was to be cognizant of the fact that the Enterprise's hangar facilities didn't seem to offer much flexibility beyond accommodating the existing shuttlecraft design.
The new nacelles are the most obvious departure from the familiar Class F design. By setting them rearward and making them slightly larger in diameter resulted in something that looks longer than it is and gives the craft a distinct look from the familiar. The new design looks faster which conveys the idea that this is meant to be a somewhat more advanced version of the F but faster and with extended range. A consequence of the rearward set nacelles is that the access hatch would have to work somewhat different than the F's because there's no longer any nacelle to support the swing-down gangway panel. Although I haven't detailed it the idea is that the gangway panel swings further downward and steps fold out from it in similar fashion seen on today's executive jets. The dilating upper hatch panels function exactly the same as the F's. Another consequence of the design is that the leading support pylon is more steeply raked than the H's
Two small notations about the H's nacelles. The add only about 2-2.5 ft. to the overall length and they are only marginally wider the the F's nacelles due to the very gently tapering angle of the nacelles. So the overall width of the H is mere inches more than the F's. Also the diameter of the aft end of the H's nacelles is exactly the same as the F's and they share the exact same aft cowl and spheres.
Another distinct difference for the H's design is the rearranging of the landing supports. The F has retracting landings struts in the forward part of its nacelles along with a single fixed strut in the rear. The H reverses that arrangement by having its retracting struts in the aft part of its nacelles and the single fixed strut centres under the bow. Many of the elements that go into the design of the H's landing struts are the same as the F's. The effect of this rearrangment is practically nil as I wanted the overall height of the veicle (when landed) to be exctly the same as the F.
The interior layout of the H is meant to be much the same as the F's and they're meant to share the same flexibile interior dependent on mission profile. But there is one distinct difference and that is on the forwad bulkhed. The H has a very large display screen that serves much the same function as the main viewer on the Enterprise's bridge. Under general practice it displays the immediate view forward of the craft and effectively mimics a large viewport that spans the entire width of the cabin. But like the larger version aboard the Enterprise it can be used in any number of ways including displaying multiple images at once. TOS could have done this if they had had the idea (and they might have given what we saw in "The Cage's" bridge) and given the time and money to do the optical effects. Today the idea is pretty much old hat and little different than the displays found on any flatscreen television, desktop computer, laptop, tablet or smartphone, but in the 1960s it would have looked radical and very advanced. It would also have been a logical extrapolation from what was already seen on TOS given they had flatscreen display everyway in the series.
The H is a bit larger than the F. And I do mean only a bit. Given that the H is larger it made sense (to mean) to build aroud it because then wherever the H can fit the F will will fit even better.
The H sprang from the idea of the shuttlecraft seen in TAS' "Slaver Weapon" episode. That design (which I have modeled a "realistic" version of) was unlike any shuttlecraft design seen in TOS (of which we only saw the one). While I did work up a more "real" version of the TAS design I couldn't help but think of what TOS might have managed to do if given the chance. It struck me that they wouldn't have strayed too far from what they already had (indeed they most likely would have simply used what they already had). But as a thought exercise I wondered what could be.
So using the familiar Class H as the template I toyed with what could be changed and remain in the realm of what TOS could have done with a little extra time and money. Another important parameter was to be cognizant of the fact that the Enterprise's hangar facilities didn't seem to offer much flexibility beyond accommodating the existing shuttlecraft design.
The new nacelles are the most obvious departure from the familiar Class F design. By setting them rearward and making them slightly larger in diameter resulted in something that looks longer than it is and gives the craft a distinct look from the familiar. The new design looks faster which conveys the idea that this is meant to be a somewhat more advanced version of the F but faster and with extended range. A consequence of the rearward set nacelles is that the access hatch would have to work somewhat different than the F's because there's no longer any nacelle to support the swing-down gangway panel. Although I haven't detailed it the idea is that the gangway panel swings further downward and steps fold out from it in similar fashion seen on today's executive jets. The dilating upper hatch panels function exactly the same as the F's. Another consequence of the design is that the leading support pylon is more steeply raked than the H's
Two small notations about the H's nacelles. The add only about 2-2.5 ft. to the overall length and they are only marginally wider the the F's nacelles due to the very gently tapering angle of the nacelles. So the overall width of the H is mere inches more than the F's. Also the diameter of the aft end of the H's nacelles is exactly the same as the F's and they share the exact same aft cowl and spheres.
Another distinct difference for the H's design is the rearranging of the landing supports. The F has retracting landings struts in the forward part of its nacelles along with a single fixed strut in the rear. The H reverses that arrangement by having its retracting struts in the aft part of its nacelles and the single fixed strut centres under the bow. Many of the elements that go into the design of the H's landing struts are the same as the F's. The effect of this rearrangment is practically nil as I wanted the overall height of the veicle (when landed) to be exctly the same as the F.
The interior layout of the H is meant to be much the same as the F's and they're meant to share the same flexibile interior dependent on mission profile. But there is one distinct difference and that is on the forwad bulkhed. The H has a very large display screen that serves much the same function as the main viewer on the Enterprise's bridge. Under general practice it displays the immediate view forward of the craft and effectively mimics a large viewport that spans the entire width of the cabin. But like the larger version aboard the Enterprise it can be used in any number of ways including displaying multiple images at once. TOS could have done this if they had had the idea (and they might have given what we saw in "The Cage's" bridge) and given the time and money to do the optical effects. Today the idea is pretty much old hat and little different than the displays found on any flatscreen television, desktop computer, laptop, tablet or smartphone, but in the 1960s it would have looked radical and very advanced. It would also have been a logical extrapolation from what was already seen on TOS given they had flatscreen display everyway in the series.
While looking through Trekcore's collection of screencaps I came across images of TOS-R's depiction of the flight deck and shuttlecraft.
Seriously,
I can only say I think it looks simply horrible. It certainly pales in comparison to the filming of the original miniature set. In their quest to supposedly "improve" the set they completely trashed it with something that looks cheap and not in the least convincing.
Seriously,
I can only say I think it looks simply horrible. It certainly pales in comparison to the filming of the original miniature set. In their quest to supposedly "improve" the set they completely trashed it with something that looks cheap and not in the least convincing.
The shuttlebay does have the problem of being very fake-CGI looking, plus there are all those people in the observation gallery and other places that couldn't possibly have existed in a 1967 TV show. In general, I honestly think that they should have decided whether to go "all new" with the effects or just replicate the original in HD, instead of this odd compromise. But since we still have the original FX it doesn't bother me too much.While looking through Trekcore's collection of screencaps I came across images of TOS-R's depiction of the flight deck and shuttlecraft.
Seriously,
What does annoy me more is when they added elements to the live-action footage. Both in Immunity Syndrome and JTB a section of observation gallery was pasted in above the parked shuttle. This means that if TOS-R is to be believed there is a whole entry foyer and access corridor somehow crammed into the sides of the flight deck, areas that totally lack any doors which could match up with the set. A casual glance shows that this is wrong, how was it missed? At least with the original plain grey wall we are free to interpret what it might have been. TOS-R takes away that freedom and (frankly) makes it nonsensical.
The pasted in observation gallery isn't even at a consistent height in the two episodes(!)
I really like the part-airport-hangar, part-high-tech-garage feel to it. I especially like the under-shuttlecraft exterior lighting built-into the deck. Nice touch.
Another nice touch would be to see anti-grav devices for levitating cargo or even whole vehicles. ("The Changeling", "Obsession", "Is There in Truth No Beauty?") These could hang on the walls of this chamber.
One question I have: is there a place for an extra-large door to an adjacent cargo bay? Part of the reason I ask is because TMP shows us the hangar deck apparently adjoining a cargo hold, so that the hangar can be used to convey loading and off-loading of cargo pods to and from the starship. Another issue is where the spare parts for extra-vehicular craft would be stored. If a shuttlecraft is damaged, lost or destroyed, one can readily assume that there is a storage bay close at hand with spare parts for repairs and/or replacements.
We supposedly learned in "The Omega Glory" that a Constitution-class starship carries of standard compliment of four operational shuttlecraft at any given time. Given such a limited fleet, and given that we know these starships are highly independent in their deep-space operations, it would only make sense that with the kit-like nature of the shuttlecraft's body and engines, these little ships would be easily collapsable and storable. If a nacelle on the Columbus were damaged, the malfunctioning one could be easily removed and replaced by parts from storage. For that matter, if the Galileo were destroyed, all Kirk would have to do is give the order and Scotty could haul a series of parts out of storage and slap together a brand-new Galileo II. (There is nothing in TOS to contradict this, and every reason to believe that a nearby cargo hold probably has a bunch of collapsed shuttlecraft parts all neatly stacked together; the space taken by maybe 1.5 assembled shuttlecraft could probably house 10 shuttlecraft or more.)
It would also be interesting to see a worker-bee hangared here.
Another nice touch would be to see anti-grav devices for levitating cargo or even whole vehicles. ("The Changeling", "Obsession", "Is There in Truth No Beauty?") These could hang on the walls of this chamber.
One question I have: is there a place for an extra-large door to an adjacent cargo bay? Part of the reason I ask is because TMP shows us the hangar deck apparently adjoining a cargo hold, so that the hangar can be used to convey loading and off-loading of cargo pods to and from the starship. Another issue is where the spare parts for extra-vehicular craft would be stored. If a shuttlecraft is damaged, lost or destroyed, one can readily assume that there is a storage bay close at hand with spare parts for repairs and/or replacements.
We supposedly learned in "The Omega Glory" that a Constitution-class starship carries of standard compliment of four operational shuttlecraft at any given time. Given such a limited fleet, and given that we know these starships are highly independent in their deep-space operations, it would only make sense that with the kit-like nature of the shuttlecraft's body and engines, these little ships would be easily collapsable and storable. If a nacelle on the Columbus were damaged, the malfunctioning one could be easily removed and replaced by parts from storage. For that matter, if the Galileo were destroyed, all Kirk would have to do is give the order and Scotty could haul a series of parts out of storage and slap together a brand-new Galileo II. (There is nothing in TOS to contradict this, and every reason to believe that a nearby cargo hold probably has a bunch of collapsed shuttlecraft parts all neatly stacked together; the space taken by maybe 1.5 assembled shuttlecraft could probably house 10 shuttlecraft or more.)
It would also be interesting to see a worker-bee hangared here.
There could be large storage areas adjacent to the flight deck and service bay, but it wasn't my intent to plan out those areas. And while they can repair a sguttlecraft to a limited extent building another complete vehicle I think is beyond them.
I am thinking of designing a workpod like vehicle.
I am thinking of designing a workpod like vehicle.
This is a screencap from what Admiral Kirk first arrived aboard the Enterprise, refit not quite complete. Note the lower deck beneath the main launch bay.
This is what I was talking about.
This is what I was talking about.
Yes I know, but that doesn't really gel with how the TOS E was laid out according to the description in TMoST and MJ's cross-section drawing for the ship. Mind you that doesn't mean it isn't that way (because we never saw that part of the ship onscreen) but it's not consistent with what appears to have been the original intent.
Now I'm running this thread concurrently on another site called Treknographics101 and there the discussion drifted into speculation over what was forward of the flight deck wall (which we never saw onscreen). MJ drew the flight deck with the idea that the observation level went along that back wall as well as on each side of the deck. But that could have changed if they had ever decided to explore it. Nonetheless I've chosen to go with MJ's original intent. Now, though, that leaves us wondering what's on the other side of that wall.
The general consensus seems to be Main Engineering is located in the heart of the secondary hull. But there's a wrinkle. If you look at screencaps of the secondary hull you see the ceiling appears to suggest a curvature. Might this possibly suggest Engineering wasn't at the centre of the support hull, but rather higher up near the ship's spine? If so then that clears a lot of space right ahead of the flight deck. And if so then a layout analogous to what was seen in TMP could exist.
Fifty years on and we're still learning things about the TOS E.
Now I'm running this thread concurrently on another site called Treknographics101 and there the discussion drifted into speculation over what was forward of the flight deck wall (which we never saw onscreen). MJ drew the flight deck with the idea that the observation level went along that back wall as well as on each side of the deck. But that could have changed if they had ever decided to explore it. Nonetheless I've chosen to go with MJ's original intent. Now, though, that leaves us wondering what's on the other side of that wall.
The general consensus seems to be Main Engineering is located in the heart of the secondary hull. But there's a wrinkle. If you look at screencaps of the secondary hull you see the ceiling appears to suggest a curvature. Might this possibly suggest Engineering wasn't at the centre of the support hull, but rather higher up near the ship's spine? If so then that clears a lot of space right ahead of the flight deck. And if so then a layout analogous to what was seen in TMP could exist.
Fifty years on and we're still learning things about the TOS E.
I thought that "The Day of the Dove" pinwheel alien entity came from the upper secondary hull, exact location unclear and not necessarily precise, because it obviously had to fly through bulkheads after leaving Kirk and Kang in the Engine Room. Since the pylons meet the lower hull just ahead of the launch bay and it is presumed the Engine Room would be forward of that, the neighborhood of the topside amidships of that hull would be a good guess.
Last edited:
