The 'main hatch' in between two decks, and only on one side of the ship. How the poop would that look on the inside? I figure that the hatch was put in the middle of the edge of the hull, for simplicity... but, does it actually go to both decks? (unlikely) or is there a ramp going up to the center of the deck? Is there a deck-and-a-half hallway, to some sort of cargo area? Does ramops go up and down to the two deck levels? Does it go right into a suite of turbo lifts?
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Ever been in a split-level house?
Mark
Posted by TheWoozle (Member # 929) on :
I'm asking about THIS PARTICULAR split level house, with the front door on the mezzanine between the main floor and the basement.
Posted by Treknophyle (Member # 509) on :
On my plans, I figured a ramp along the port-starboard corridor to the outer hull - angling up.
Posted by Treknophyle (Member # 509) on :
On my plans, I figured a ramp along the port-starboard corridor to the outer hull - angling up.
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
Its only on one side because that's where the main gangway has always been on ships. That's why its called the "port" side.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
One could speculate that the gangway machinery is rather bulky and requires half a deck's worth of free space above and below. After all, if this is a relic of obsolete traditions anyway, then perhaps it is intended to do what the comparable fixture aboard the NX-01 does: directly interface with other vessels, including alien ones.
It could be that the main gangway in fact is the most versatile docking adapter aboard the ship, and can extend out like an airport boarding tube if needed. It is well positioned for its role, at the outer extremity of the ship (and of other designs as well, like the Miranda class).
It can probably be assumed that the TOS ship and the E-D had comparable fixtures, just better camouflaged. We did see the E-D dock to DS9 using some sort of a saucer rim fixture (although this time, it was starboard - a step away from tradition and towards pragmatism, with a bilaterally symmetric layout?). Perhaps once again, the main gangway was better suited for freedom-kissing alien docking adapters than any of the other docking ports aboard the ship.
Alternately, there is only one deck on the NCC-1701 rim, like the windows and the gangway suggest.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
quote:Originally posted by Timo: Alternately, there is only one deck on the NCC-1701 rim, like the windows and the gangway suggest.
The windows (and relative height) suggest two decks at the saucer rim. The Gangway location suggests it's between the two decks.
Posted by Treknophyle (Member # 509) on :
One would have port and starboard docking ports for the best of reasons: redundancy in case of damage. (Nonetheless Timo, thanks for the trivia gem).
Since the 1701 (refit) is just that - a refit (not rebuilt) 1701, one can assume that the deck layouts are similar. Thus two decks in the outer perimeter of the saucer.
The apparent lack of saucer docking ports on the 1701 could be explained by the relatively poor film resolution of TOS - or simply a desire to eliminate an obvious target.
Posted by Phoenix (Member # 966) on :
quote:Originally posted by Treknophyle: The apparent lack of saucer docking ports on the 1701 could be explained by the relatively poor film resolution of TOS - or simply a desire to eliminate an obvious target.
I don't think that the organisation that puts the bridge of every single ship it builds on the very top, in a bulging bit, covered in lights, is particularly concerned about eliminating obvious targets. Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
For what it's worth, this is how I picture it.
I figure that the upperdeck acts as a viewing balcony of sorts.
Posted by Griffworks (Member # 1014) on :
I agree w/the consensus that the most likely arrangement is for it to be set in the middle w/a possible "docking clamp" arrangement set up for afixing to other ships that don't have the standard docking port on Star Fleet vessels. However, I figured it was a large staging/greeting area, not unlike I seem to recall seeing in "Mr. Scott's Guide" or perhaps it was a fan-produced work. Anyhow, there was a ramp that led up a central corridor, as well as I seem to recall a small cargo bay not far up the corridor from the docking port area.
Makes the most sense for me.
Posted by MrNeutron (Member # 524) on :
quote:Originally posted by Reverend: For what it's worth, this is how I picture it.
I figure that the upperdeck acts as a viewing balcony of sorts.
Don't' forget that the lower of these two decks is indented rather severely because of the concave underside of the saucer. That being the case, I'd suspect that ultimately the gangway would connnect to the deck above.
Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
...and it would be Deck F and G at the saucer's center, not E anf F.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Ok, lets try that again. How about three ramps? one going straight on and up, the other two going too the left and down, and to the right and down (as you exit the airlock).
Posted by Griffworks (Member # 1014) on :
Excellent views, "Reverend". That's pretty much h ow I always envisioned it to be. A largish sized debarkation/embarkation area that was sort of in the middle of both F & G decks.
Posted by darkwing_duck1 (Member # 790) on :
quote:Originally posted by Reverend: Ok, lets try that again. How about three ramps? one going straight on and up, the other two going too the left and down, and to the right and down (as you exit the airlock).
I think your pic is a bit out of scale. Take a second look at the Rec Room scene in TMP. That room ALSO is on the "rim" of the saucer, and that "back" wall I'd say is 25-30% higher than you have yours.
Posted by TheWoozle (Member # 929) on :
I like it, but I think the ramp up to F deck.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
One more try, this time to scale.
Posted by TheWoozle (Member # 929) on :
Thanks Reverend, that pic will make a nice reference for my cut-away model. I'm thinking of doing a gently sloping ramp up to the middle of the deck, with a turbo-shaft on each side of the gangway door, and a row of vending machines.
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
DW: The Rec Deck problem is one that Andy Probert knows about. That, and the turbolift car shaped like a Tylenol capsule (which -- being 15 feet high wouldn't fit laterally along a 9-foot-high horizontal turboshaft), were artifacts of the set designer he had to answer to. Andy said that if you can figure out how the hell to make the rec deck fit in the saucer rim, go for it. But I personally don't think re-sizing the saucer to fudge it is the answer.
--Jonah
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
The shadow of the turbolift cab could be explained creatively by saying it really is powered by "turbines". Perhaps a set of semicircular airstream diverting vanes is tilted from vertical to horizontal when the lift cab changes its direction of motion?
Alternately,the cab extends airbags when in a vertical shaft, just in case the power fails and the grabbers don't grab...
Or then the transparent walls of those shafts have weird optical properties. The last remnant of the original, fairly psychedelic "Phase II" decorative style?
The Rec Deck problem could probably only be solved by saying that the back wall windows are computer-controlled displays. And that the windows we see on the saucer rim are in fact where all those private cabinets go - the ones where Kirk, Spock and McCoy had their little chat. The Rec Deck would then be somewhere on the ship centerline, aft of the bridge. Which is where the two parallel turboshafts would most logically be situated anyway.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by TheWoozle (Member # 929) on :
Who's to say that the horizontal turbo shafts are only one deck high? they could take half the above and below decks, or that might reflect the actual deck hight... That oval area at the top and bottom of the shadow might also be the 'tween deck space, for Jeffries tubes.
Posted by thelastguardian (Member # 1017) on :
quote:Originally posted by Peregrinus: DW: The Rec Deck problem is one that Andy Probert knows about. That, and the turbolift car shaped like a Tylenol capsule (which -- being 15 feet high wouldn't fit laterally along a 9-foot-high horizontal turboshaft), were artifacts of the set designer he had to answer to. Andy said that if you can figure out how the hell to make the rec deck fit in the saucer rim, go for it. But I personally don't think re-sizing the saucer to fudge it is the answer.
--Jonah
Just to set the record straight, the elevator car height problem wasn't one Andy was aware of until I pointed it out to him as I was writing Mr. Scott's Guide. When I submitted for comment the drawing used in the book, he told me I needed to change it to the tall, capsule-shaped thing seen within the cargo bay elevator shaft. I explained why such a car wouldn't work, and he basically said, "yeah, okay."
Shane
Posted by thelastguardian (Member # 1017) on :
quote:Originally posted by Griffworks: That's pretty much how I always envisioned it to be. A largish sized debarkation/embarkation area that was sort of in the middle of both F & G decks.
As I understand it, the intent was that the gangway door was for ease of crew embarkation/debarkation, with a ramp leading directly up to Deck 6, where the crew's quarters are. In fact, I did a section drawing of the gangway door/ramp for MSG, but that item (among others) was cut from the book when it went from 160 to 128 pages.
Shane
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
When I talked to Andy about it, he said when he first went to work on TMP, he pointed the turbolift and rec deck problems out to the set designer, but was essentially shot down.
--Jonah
Posted by TheWoozle (Member # 929) on :
quote:Originally posted by thelastguardian: In fact, I did a section drawing of the gangway door/ramp for MSG, but that item (among others) was cut from the book when it went from 160 to 128 pages.Shane
... AND THE OTHER 32 PAGES ARE AVAILABLE? Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Hello Shane Johnson! Welcome to FLARE!! WOOHOO! Hi.
ahem.
heh.
So we've had Mojo and Shane here now... can we get anyone else? (I'm guessing Rick or Mike might read - but will they post!?!)
Andrew
Posted by Phoenix (Member # 966) on :
quote:Originally posted by AndrewR: Hello Shane Johnson! Welcome to FLARE!! WOOHOO! Hi.
ahem.
heh.
So we've had Mojo and Shane here now... can we get anyone else? (I'm guessing Rick or Mike might read - but will they post!?!)
Andrew
If someone in power is reading, could they please say that the Prometheus is actually NX-74913, and that NX-59650 was a ruse.
Oh, and explain the whole TOS registry issue. Posted by thelastguardian (Member # 1017) on :
quote:Originally posted by Peregrinus: When I talked to Andy about it, he said when he first went to work on TMP, he pointed the turbolift and rec deck problems out to the set designer, but was essentially shot down.
--Jonah
Ummm...no.
Actually, concerning the Rec Deck, that may well be true. Andy told me the same thing, and I do know that he and the set designer experienced some friction.
As for the turbolift, I remember that particular phone call quite clearly, as well as the silence on the line when I asked him how an elevator car 12-15 feet high is going to pass sideways through the nine-foot decks of the primary hull.
Shane
Posted by MrNeutron (Member # 524) on :
quote:Originally posted by Peregrinus: When I talked to Andy about it, he said when he first went to work on TMP, he pointed the turbolift and rec deck problems out to the set designer, but was essentially shot down.
--Jonah
The set designer in question is Harold ("Hal") Michelson...
...who also took the San Francisco Air Tram away from Andy when he declared it a "set".
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
What do you mean by 'took away'?
Posted by MrNeutron (Member # 524) on :
quote:Originally posted by AndrewR: What do you mean by 'took away'?
The Air Tram was being handled by the effects dept., but somewhere during production Hal decided it was a "set" and redesigned it.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Ahhh. Did it have to do with cost - like the Galileo in the series or Ego?
Are there alternate drawings/designs for the Air Tram?
Posted by MrNeutron (Member # 524) on :
quote:Originally posted by AndrewR: Ahhh. Did it have to do with cost - like the Galileo in the series or Ego?
Are there alternate drawings/designs for the Air Tram?
I dunno if it was ego or just the fact that there was going to be a full-sized version on the set, so Hal decided it was a set element and his domain.
There are alternate versions of the air-tram. I have a stack of photocopies Andy gave me of drawings from TMP and Back to the Future, and amongst those are some air tram drawings. One is double-hulled and has a BART label on the nose (Bay Area Rapid Transit).
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Is it as squarish as the one we saw - or was it more... roundish
Has AndyP ever come here to Flare to have a look?
Is he still interested in Trek??
Andrew
Posted by MrNeutron (Member # 524) on :
quote:Originally posted by AndrewR: Is it as squarish as the one we saw - or was it more... roundish
Has AndyP ever come here to Flare to have a look?
Is he still interested in Trek??
Andrew
The trams in question are no rounder than the one that appeared in the final film. In fact, the one that appears seems to have been influenced by Andy's designs.
Andy's feelings are Trek are somewhat mixed, I think. His feeling is the show died when Roddenberry did.
Posted by darkwing_duck1 (Member # 790) on :
quote:Originally posted by Peregrinus: DW: The Rec Deck problem is one that Andy Probert knows about. That, and the turbolift car shaped like a Tylenol capsule (which -- being 15 feet high wouldn't fit laterally along a 9-foot-high horizontal turboshaft), were artifacts of the set designer he had to answer to. Andy said that if you can figure out how the hell to make the rec deck fit in the saucer rim, go for it. But I personally don't think re-sizing the saucer to fudge it is the answer.
--Jonah
Actually, I have something radical to propose, though it will likely p*ss off EVERYBODY, Okudaites, Johnsonians and others alike:
I accept the overall size of certain sets like the Rec Deck and simply scale up the rest of the ship to fit them. This renders the saucer section approx 2 1/2 to 3 decks thick at the rim. The "Arboretum" in the secondary hull would be approx 2 decks high. Details like the airlocks are way oversized on the shooting model, and I hold that the "real" Enterprise's airlocks are about 45-50% the size shown.
This makes much more sense to me and solves problems I have with ALL the "major" scalings of the ship, namely lack of interior volume. Remember, these ships have to support a crew of up to 500 for as long as 5 years. The amount of consumables (air, water, raw foodstuffs, spare parts, matter/antimatter tanks, etc) ALONE would require massive amounts of storage space. Then there's the matter of where to put the auxilliary fusion generators, phaser banks, shield generators, so on and so forth.
Scaling up the ship makes more sense to me than trying to cram all that into the existing "official" scaled ship. It also solves many of the "oops" items people have been obsessing over (like the Engineering corridor issue, turboshaft sizes, etc)...
My opinion, of course, ymmv! Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
just a side note, despite the licensed specs, theres no canon reference to the crew being increased to 500 by the upgrade, if anything, one would think the point of a refit might be to lower the amount of crew required to run the ship, not increase it..
canonically, by STVI, the E-A only had a crew of 300
Posted by Middy Seafort (Member # 951) on :
Reverand,
I must say those are excellent postulates on what the deck surrounding the gangway hatch.
On another note:
Shane Johnson,
It is good to see you about. See what, or who, you miss when you don't hang around the boards as much anymore. I still have my dog-worn copy of "Mr. Scott's Guide" and your excellent "Starfleet Uniform Guide."
Middy
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
quote:Originally posted by MrNeutron: Andy's feelings are Trek are somewhat mixed, I think. His feeling is the show died when Roddenberry did.
For some reason I got a flash of Monty Python when I read that.
"I'm getting better!"
"No you're not, you'll be stone dead in a moment." Posted by Dan Stack (Member # 516) on :
quote:Originally posted by CaptainMike: just a side note, despite the licensed specs, theres no canon reference to the crew being increased to 500 by the upgrade
If my memory of ST:TMP is correct, I recall that the computer in one scene, towards the end of the film, gave a crew complement of 430 or so, just like TOS.
Posted by Griffworks (Member # 1014) on :
There actually is canon proof in ST:TMP, tho not at the end, IIRC. As I recall, there's dialogue from some sort of computer voice (or maybe Decker?) in ST:TMP about crew status. I think it's prior to Enterprise launching and breaks it down by "xxx on duty, xxx off duty". I want to say it does indeed add up to 430, tho won't swear to it. Been a long while since I sat down and listened to that on my old VHS "Longer Version" of the movie. Have to pop it and my DVD SE versions in tomorrow to see what I can find.
Posted by Griffworks (Member # 1014) on :
Aaaaaannnndddd... I was wrong...
It is indeed towards the end of the movie, tho I now forget the exact scene. I think it's a scene where we see Decker on a wall-screen talking to Ilia-Probe and Kirk is drinking a beverage of some sort in his quarters. Might be some bridge scene, tho I'm thinking it was in Kirk's quarters.
Anyhow, the breakdown is:
172 On Duty
248 Off Duty
11 in Sickbay
Totals up to 431.
Now, doesn't it drop down to like 300 for ST:VI? If so, why are there still crewmembers call "crammed in" to crew-bunk spacing instead of having either doubled up quarters as we saw in TOS...? Darn. Now I'm forced to watch another Star Trek movie again.... Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
The ship in ST6 might be configured for this diplomatic escort mission only, leaving all the research crew ashore. Which would be why Spock had to ask the ship's surgeon to operate on that torpedo, instead of having Dr O'Dour from the Gaseous Anomaly Lab do the job.
Also, even if 130 researcers (mostly civilians or commissioned folks in all likelihood) were offloaded, no current navy would allow the enlisteds to squat in the empty officer or guest quarters...
Where in ST6 would the reference to 300 crew be seen or heard?
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by darkwing_duck1 (Member # 790) on :
quote:Originally posted by Timo: The ship in ST6 might be configured for this diplomatic escort mission only, leaving all the research crew ashore. Which would be why Spock had to ask the ship's surgeon to operate on that torpedo, instead of having Dr O'Dour from the Gaseous Anomaly Lab do the job.
Also, even if 130 researcers (mostly civilians or commissioned folks in all likelihood) were offloaded, no current navy would allow the enlisteds to squat in the empty officer or guest quarters...
Where in ST6 would the reference to 300 crew be seen or heard?
Timo Saloniemi
During the search for the assassins, there is a verbal reference: "We have a crew of 300 turning their quarters inside out."
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
...While the other 130 take a much-needed nap?
...Or do what they were hired to do, which is to keep the ship from exploding?
...Or keep their quarters in such a condition that turning them inside out wouldn't really make a difference?
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by TheWoozle (Member # 929) on :
In ST:VI the torpedo launcher looked a whole lot more automated, that cuts out atleast a dozen people. Two more if you cut out the guy on each side beating the drum to keep time.
Posted by Griffworks (Member # 1014) on :
Thanks for the specific reference, "darkwing_duck1". I couldn't remember for sure what was said, just had the number of 300 tumbling about in my head. Thus the need to watch the movie again, if only for the specific reference.
Good points, Timo. No need to be so sarcastic, tho, is there...?
And I'd think that the "operation" that was performed was one that didn't require technical expertise so much as an extra set of hands. Thus, waiting for "Dr O'Dour from the Gaseous Anomaly Lab" to meet Spock would have been a waste of time on his part.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
It's *always* a good time for sarcasm. But yes, I agree that torp system automatisation would no dooubt reduce crew requirements. And that the torp assembly task probably didn't require a rocket scientist.
But it would be fun every now and then to see the heroes utilize the skills of the scientists and specialists they supposedly have aboard. Kirk did that in TOS a lot, having one of those 20-something Ph.D.'ettes for just about every imaginable need. Couldn't we have seen some forensic pro in miniskirt analysing the Klingon blood, instead of dull old Chekov?
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by TheWoozle (Member # 929) on :
they had to cut the klingon forensics specialist, to have space for the court reporter.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
I have a suspicion that, in the 60s, one could give a few lines to an extra and pay them much less, relative to the amount paid the series regulars and guest stars, than today.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)