Unseen TOS....

[Warped9]

Trying not to go too far afield, but...

This was my initial approach to the Enterprise's shuttlecraft complement when I was working out an integrated vehicle reconciling the divergent interior and exterior we saw onscreen.



My revised view was trying to reconcile the shuttlecraft Copernicus from TAS' "The Slaver Weapon" into how it could have more likely have looked in that episode had been done when TOS was in production. Of course I was speculating because if "The Slaver Weapon" had been done as a live-action episode during TOS' run they would most likely have just used the familiar Class F design. But, hey, we are exploring unseen elements of TOS if they had had just a bit more time and money.

Note that when I got around to building my 3D hangar deck (based off my shuttlecraft drawings) I made a point of being able to accommodate the slightly longer Class H variant (as I called it).




One aspect of my hangar deck model I'm not really satisfied with is the colouring. I simply don't have any reliable information on the real colours used on the hangar deck miniature. I'd really like to rectify that issue. I could say the same about the interior of my shuttlecraft models. For the exterior of the shuttlecraft I deferred to some of the paint colours for the 11ft. Enterprise miniature which mighn't have been the correct thing to do.

 

[publiusr]

Yeah, I thought of Lazarus' ship as well for the dome if it were to be repurposed as a workpod. Or something borrowed from Lost in Space.

I think Lazarus used a tiny travel pod---and modified a surrounding coil for his own purposes on a planet that may have had unusual properties.

Does beg the question: what exactly would cause weathering on a starship?

There is a very trek-like answer to that---tholins
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tholin

You come out of warp on the outskirts of a star system and turn down the 'fields---but the outskirts of a star system is where you see this crap....but, it is everywhere, perhaps. From the wiki:

"Tholins may be a major constituent of the interstellar medium.[2]"

 

[Colonel Midnight]

You can pack things in like sardines, but you need a realistic way of shuffling them around without much trouble. And TOS didn’t show us a ship where things are packed in with no room to spare.

I can also accept that there is no easy rationale for how the shuttlecraft are numbered.

Perhaps, and this is going off RL, it’s a combination of shuttle craft and lifeboats (in containers) that make up the compliment… with the numbering being based off what side they’re stowed on?

Convoluted, yes, but it’s similar to how the small boats and life rafts were numbered on the ships I served on… even for the port side, odd for the starboard side, running from bow to stern.

So, to roughly illustrate:

Bow
2 1
4 3
6 5
8 7
Stern

So, ‘Galileo’ is the fourth boat (of some sort) typically found/stowed on the starboard side.

Cheers,
-CM-

 

[Warped9]

Alright, I’m putting this workpod aside for now. I’m not coming up with anything interesting at this point so I’ll revisit it later.

 

[trynda1701]

Probably a good idea if you're not settling on a design. In the Dock shots you showed earlier, they'd be like dots anyway unless you did a REALLY close in shot.

 

[Warped9]

Sometimes something comes to me when I’m not focusing on it. Best to work on something else for now.

 

[Warped9]

Since we were talking about shuttlecraft I decided to take another look at mine. Here is a look at the Class F interior. Note the interior is in-model lighting with no outside sources (like a studio set would have).

Other notes. The chairs are actually a bit higher off the deck than the originals which were initially built for a set with a lower ceiling. As such the occupants sit more comfortably upright. The width of this interior is pretty much the same as the original set, but the ceiling is a bit lower. Finally the overall cabin length is shorter, helped by the chairs elevated a bit higher off the deck, which means the occupants (now sitting higher) need less leg room than the original set. Finally the chairs are not exactly like the originals, which I found challenging to model, so I tweaked them slightly so they coukd still pass muster.

 

[Richard Baker]

Love it!
Make me think though, both the TOS shuttle and the 1999 Eagle have forward windows which with the interior design are impossible for the pilots to look out of...

 

[blssdwlf]

Love it!
Make me think though, both the TOS shuttle and the 1999 Eagle have forward windows which with the interior design are impossible for the pilots to look out of...

Yeah. I do like the offset though as it makes it less likely to get accidentally blinded from a direct beam and it gives off the impression that flight is handled with sensors and not visual control.

 

[Warped9]

Love it!
Make me think though, both the TOS shuttle and the 1999 Eagle have forward windows which with the interior design are impossible for the pilots to look out of...

From the interior set width as well as the angle and height of the forward bulkhead it is totally impossible to line up those three “openings” with the three panels on the exterior hull. Numerous people have tried—there is no way whatsoever to make it work. To do it means drastically altering the shape and appearance of the interior and/or the exterior.

To avoid radically altering the appearance of the interior or exterior I rationalized the three panels on the forward interior bulkhead are actually overhead displays much like those on the Enterprise bridge. They can display whatever is required, even mimicking actual windows looking out the forward hull.

Mind you, unless those “windows” were set much lower, there is no way the occupants could look out directly forward while seated. This was lent weight in “Metamorphosis” when we see the shuttlecraft is flying by instruments (of course) with the portals closed, and Kirk doesn’t open the forward “window” until after Spock and he look through their scanners. And when Kirk does open the “window” everyone has to look upward rather than forward to see what is outside.

Another issue at play is that the exterior hull tapers forward toward the bow on both port and starboard as well as underneath. Meanwhile the interior cabin is perfectly straight with walls, ceiling and deck running parallel to each other. So there is no way the exterior shape can match the interior without drastically altering the exterior appearance, or vice versa. The consequence is the access hatch on the inside can’t work as depicted onscreen. The flip side, though, is the available space between hulls allows for mechanicals and compartments implied onscreen.

The shuttlecraft as depicted onscreen is a collection of production compromises, just as the hangar deck is as well.

 

[caveat_imperator]

I really like those changes you made to the shuttle seats.

 

[aridas sofia]

The problem with the Galileo windows is a consequence of not following the original Kellogg (and Jefferies) ideas of having a big window that wraps over onto the top. I think it was determined that would have resulted in a SFX nightmare, so like the tiny windows in Pike’s cabin and the observation deck that don’t match anything on the Enterprise exterior, this was a fix that requires even more imagination than normal on the part of the viewer.

 

[Warped9]

I'm presently doing some experimentation in SketchUp and Maxwell Render to create a lighting effect for the shuttlecraft, more specifically the nacelle domes and "landing ights" on the bow of the craft.

Apparently the original intent for the shuttlecraft was to have the nacelle domes light up as well as the bow lights (two rectangular panels under the bow on the port side). Indeed the Polar Lights 1/32 scale Galileo model kit gives you transparent pieces to actually do that if you so wish.

The fullsize miniature never did have those lights installed likely because they reasoned since the mockup would be seen only when landed then all the exterior lights would be off anyway--so save the time and expense of installing something you will likely never use. In extent they didn't bother including any lights on the filming miniature, except for the aft impulse engines, possibly because they thought it wasn't worth the trouble.

Nonetheless, since this project is about unseen elements of TOS, I'd like to see what it could have looked like if they had actually installed those lighting effects on the shuttlecraft miniature and fullsize mockup.

On the fullsize mockup it probably would have been straightforward enough to mimic the lighting effect they did for the nacelle domes of the 11ft. Enterprise. Maybe easier because they would have been working with something larger. On the other hand they also might have gone for a simpler effect to save costs. This could have been especially true for the shuttlecraft miniature particularly if they had wanted consistency between the fullsize mockup and the miniature.

In terms of colour I’m thinking something amber like similar to the 11ft. Enterprise.

Stay tuned...

 

[FormerLurker]

From the interior set width as well as the angle and height of the forward bulkhead it is totally impossible to line up those three “openings” with the three panels on the exterior hull. Numerous people have tried—there is no way whatsoever to make it work. To do it means drastically altering the shape and appearance of the interior and/or the exterior.

To avoid radically altering the appearance of the interior or exterior I rationalized the three panels on the forward interior bulkhead are actually overhead displays much like those on the Enterprise bridge. They can display whatever is required, even mimicking actual windows looking out the forward hull.

Mind you, unless those “windows” were set much lower, there is no way the occupants could look out directly forward while seated. This was lent weight in “Metamorphosis” when we see the shuttlecraft is flying by instruments (of course) with the portals closed, and Kirk doesn’t open the forward “window” until after Spock and he look through their scanners. And when Kirk does open the “window” everyone has to look upward rather than forward to see what is outside.

Another issue at play is that the exterior hull tapers forward toward the bow on both port and starboard as well as underneath. Meanwhile the interior cabin is perfectly straight with walls, ceiling and deck running parallel to each other. So there is no way the exterior shape can match the interior without drastically altering the exterior appearance, or vice versa. The consequence is the access hatch on the inside can’t work as depicted onscreen. The flip side, though, is the available space between hulls allows for mechanicals and compartments implied onscreen.

The shuttlecraft as depicted onscreen is a collection of production compromises, just as the hangar deck is as well.

I'm fairly certain that this is the reason that as often as possible, the TNG era shuttles were built as complete interior/exterior mockups, so everything actually fit together.

 

[Warped9]

In the mid to late 1980s they had smaller portable cameras that allowed them to film in more enclosed spaces, hence you could build a mockup as a complete thing. Mind you the first fullsize TNG shuttle exterior we saw looked nothing like the miniature, and it was an awful looking thing that had nothing on the TOS shuttlecraft mockup. They got better later.

 

[FormerLurker]

There were smalller cameras in the '60s, but they didn't record sound and each shot lasted seconds. 16 millimeter and even 8 millimeter were probably intended to compensate for this, but the upscaling was often dubious at best.

 

[Richard Baker]

I think they also had a "snorkle cam", a kind of upside down periscope attachment used with architectural models

 

[MGagen]

An overlooked source of Enterprise hull weathering: Apollo's dirty fingerprints...

M.

P.S.: Love your Shuttle interior, Warp9. Someday I may try to give my shuttle one.

 

[Warped9]

The problem with the Galileo windows is a consequence of not following the original Kellogg (and Jefferies) ideas of having a big window that wraps over onto the top. I think it was determined that would have resulted in a SFX nightmare, so like the tiny windows in Pike’s cabin and the observation deck that don’t match anything on the Enterprise exterior, this was a fix that requires even more imagination than normal on the part of the viewer.

Even if they had had just the angled forward bulkhead transparent It might have created issues. With some creative thought it might still have worked. It certainly would have looked futuristic. But I think popular SF wasn't quite yet ready to think in those terms yet.

I worked up something just for fun to se what it could look like.

 

[Warped9]

The shuttlecraft miniature lighted possibly as it was originally envisioned. I did my best to simulate the spinning lights in the nacelle domes similar to that on the 11ft. Enterprise. I also added lights to the two panels under the forward port bow. Those lights were initially refered to as landing lights, but I think of them as a sensor array.

I think this relatively simple lighting effect would have given the miniature an added dimension of realism and being something actually functioning rather than just a static model.

BTW does anyone know the actual size of the original filming miniature? Just curious.




I'm often tempted to darken and desaturate these images more for a smidgen more realism, but thats not how it looked on TOS. That said we know the live-action footage often had more theatrical lighting thanks to Jerry Finnerman. If TOS' exterior fx could have been given a sharper look than we might have gottten a bit better and more nuanced lighting effect than what we had.