posted
Sorry if this is in the wrong place, but making models is creative . . . isn't it?
Anyway, does anyone have this kit, specifically the instructions? I ask because a friend of mine gave me his copy after he'd finished with it and I recall there being info regarding the crew. Now I can't find it! It told us how many science and medical staff, how many engineers, security people and command people the Enterprise typically had a board.
If anyone has this info I'd really appreciate it if you could share it with me! Thanks!
-------------------- If you cant convince them, confuse them.
Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
According to the instructions, the ship is supposed to have:
55 officers of command rank 136 medical and scientific research personnel 132 engineering specialists 15 communication specialists 90 member security force
428 total crew
This does not agree with the crew complement given on the TMP blueprints (72 officers, 428 crew, 500 total) or the two on-screen complements given:
TMP (from the 83 expanded and DVD DE versions): 172 at station 248 off duty 11 in sickbay 431 total
TUC (Valeris' line): "We have a crew of 300..."
-------------------- The difference between genius and idiocy? Genius has its limits.
Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
300 sure sounds more accurate than 431! Holy shit: with 43 people aboard, you'd have to elbow your way through the corridors! Even with a crew of 300, most would have to "hot rack" bunks and privacy would be nonexistant.
Crazy.
Waaaaay to uber-military for Trek IMHO.
You know what edition of the model you have? Starshipmodeler.com has a archive of model instructions- search there for starters nad mabye PM Soundeffect as well. If that doesn't work, go ask Mr. Owl.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Hi there! If you need the instructions itself, I can scan them for you, but I'm really encouraging you to avoid the paint sufggestions as they're almost all wrong. If it was just the officer callouts, you got your answer above.
Woodside Kid - That sounds right - add Kirk and Spock and you get the 430 crew limit and sounds right to what I remember.
As for the model, don't know what edition my friend has as a) it was years ago, and b) he's since thrown it away (he broke it and couldn't be arsed to fix it! )
SoundEffect - thanks, but the crew info was all that I was after!
Thanks again folks!
-------------------- If you cant convince them, confuse them.
Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Enterprise could have been understrength in TMP. Ditto for TUC.
The TOS Enterprise allegedly had either 400 or 430, depending on which source you want to go with and whether you think it's plausible that Kirk was rounding down. Naturally they wanted the movie ship to be bigger, hence the suggestion of 500 for TMP.
There's no way the movie era ship could hold 428 crew in those two-person suites Shane Johnson drew for Mr Scott's Guide, but TUC showed rooms about the same size with three triple bunks. Based on that, I think such a crew is plausible, and they still have it better than real warship crews. I generally don't like the redressed TNG sets used in St VI, but in this case I'd make an exception.
>>>>>WARNING: SHAMELESS SELF PROMOTION AHEAD<<<<< I haven't mustered the enthusiam to to do the crew yet, but awhile back I did a breakdown of the 72 officers, based on Bob Fletcher's behind-the-scenes notes about the department & organization breakdown of the movie-era Enterprise, with a little tinkering from Intruder1701 (who has real-world naval experience, and was able to shed some light for me on how things are organized).
posted
Nice work Marian, but I'd probably boost the officer count to four for most key departments (Radiation control for example ). That way there would always be one officer on duty per shift and an alternate to cover absentses or leaves.
AS to cramming all those crew into the ship: it's really too much to believe: I know they were making blatant comnparisons with modern mmilitary ships in CTVI, but c'mon: hundreds of years of technological advancment should yield far more automation (thus less crew) than what was depicted in that movie. The explanation is that Enterprise-A was used (much as her predacessor) as a training vessel towards the end of her operational life nad starfleet wants it's crews to be able to do everything manually in case of emergencies.
Mabye Excelsior has those cool two-person crew quarters from Mr. Scott's guide.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
We also don't have any evidence for either of the on-screen figures I mentioned being the normal operational complement of the Enterprise. You could reasonably make an argument that each of those situations is unusual. In TMP, the ship is being booted out of spacedock early and thus may be carrying more (or less) than her usual manning. As for TUC, the mission is essentially supposed to be a milk run escort; presumably she would not require her usual complement of scientists.
-------------------- The difference between genius and idiocy? Genius has its limits.
Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: Nice work Marian
Thank you!
quote:but I'd probably boost the officer count to four for most key departments (Radiation control for example ). That way there would always be one officer on duty per shift and an alternate to cover absentses or leaves.
Believe me, I would love to add to the list. More than one scientist per specialty, for starters. I had a really hard time keeping it down to 72. But that's the problem--I had to fit all the necessary jobs into that 72 officers limit.
I don't think there needs to be a fourth person, though; if there's an absense, someone pulls a double shift. I have no RL military experience, but I've had civilian jobs like that--if I got sick or took a vacation day, they had to wake someone up. Needless to say, I took responsibility for not getting sick, and vacationed on the weekends.
quote:AS to cramming all those crew into the ship: it's really too much to believe: I know they were making blatant comnparisons with modern mmilitary ships in CTVI, but c'mon: hundreds of years of technological advancment should yield far more automation (thus less crew) than what was depicted in that movie.
They do have less crew. The USS Blue Ridge is two-thirds the length of Enterprise, and has a crew of 819. Plus 240 staff personnel (she's a command ship). And the Kitty Hawk has ten times the Enterprise crew (5000) while being only 50m longer.
Franz Joseph's deck plans of the TOS Enterprise found room for 430, using only the TV show set (albiet sometimes with as many as four beds per room, for the crew quarters). And the movie-era ship's primary hull is enough wider to have a whole 'nother ring of rooms around the rim, on two decks.
In short, I think it's believable. But I think my iconoclasm is pretty much established at this point.
Marian
This random sig quote is brought to you by Jim McCarthy: "According to the specifications in the manual, fully loaded and charged, tanks and all, it should have weighed no more than 11.1 kilos--but somewhere along the way we lost the decimal point and Duke wouldn't let me go back and look for it." --David Gerrold, A Matter For Men
Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
Valid points: I just think a ship of exploration would have far more science gear/equipment than crew. Of course that's more in keeping the TOS mission than the more militaristic role shown in the movies.
I guess the Enterprise-A was never really an Exporer though. Sad that.
I just see Starfleet ships having scientific work for crew to do instead of them just manning posts and being crammed in bunks like sardines (or submariners).
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:hundreds of years of technological advancment should yield far more automation (thus less crew) than what was depicted in that movie.
Modern Aircraft carriers have 5000 crew, but not because we couldn't automate a lot of it. In fact, we could probably have carriers with 1200 people and a lot more automation. But, when the bad guys come knocking, it's good to have lots of extra self programming computers to pitch in and keep things moving and fighting, so we have large crews. And, to keep those crew busy, we cut back on automation, so they have stuff to do (and to cut back on complexity and points of failure).
Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
posted
Thus yielding a less advanced ship overall. Most "mosern aircraft carriers" have one sole function: to allow for the employ of aircraft. Everyone aboard serves that goal in some way.
Enterprise is more like a WWII battleship than a modern carrier- but with the same exact level of automation! Silly.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: Enterprise is more like a WWII battleship than a modern carrier- but with the same exact level of automation! Silly.
Man, it must really suck for those guys in Engineering who have to shovel antimatter into the reaction chamber by hand.
Except, of course, they don't do that, which neatly underscores how totally wrong you are.
I also don't get where this "more crew = less of a scientific mission" thing of yours is coming from. 23rd century ships are just a little more crowded, is all.
Marian
This random sig quote is brought to you by Sluggy Freelance: "I don't care how you rationalize it, it's mean to nuke us."
Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by jesus X: [QUOTE]But, when the bad guys come knocking, it's good to have lots of extra self programming computers to pitch in and keep things moving and fighting, so we have large crews.
Which is a less grim way of saying the ship needs to be able to continue functioning if it takes casualties. If you staff a ship with exactly the number of people you need, and then some of them get sucked on by a salt monster or turned into a styrofoam dodecahydron, well, you're screwed.
Marian
This random sig quote is brought to you by Hildy Johnson: "When I'm feeling festive I might put on a colorful skirt, more of a sarong, really, and never fret about the hemline. But most of what I wear wouldn't have raised eyebrows if I had gone back in time and walked the streets in the years before sex changing." --John Varley, Steel Beach
Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
It told us how many science and medical staff, how many engineers, security people and command people the Enterprise typically had a board.![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
)![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
