Wow. I like. I like very much.
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
The design of the helm station is certainly unusual. The convex control surface, the steering wheel, and just the asymmetric design of it is certainly odd. However, I think it'll grow on me eventually.
That's really the first big and clear picture I've seen of the bridge. I really like it, I must say. It has a lot of unusual design elements that make it kinda cool to sit and look at. You've got a ring of big control consoles with physical buttons, levers, sliders, knobs, etc that give a nice feel. The color are a nice combination of the metalic silver of the consoles with the tan-gray of the walls and elevated floor sections. There's also a nice use of pastels on the wall-mounted controls. I like the handrails and support handgrips lining the elevated bridge section and built into the supports and consoles. I'm not sure if it's a set element or a design element, but are those track lights on the bridge ceiling?
Posted by Stingray (Member # 621) on :
What I don't like (and I do like it, BTW) is the little grill thingies that look like they're off a coffee maker or hamburger grill. If anybody can put up the pic, they're at the top right of the helm console pic. Up and just a little left of the handrail that's on the very right side of the pic.
Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :
The details are nice, but the bridge as a whole is even much less imaginative than I feared. It has neither the expected "industrial" look, nor is the layout in any way different than on later ships. The sensor thingy hanging from the ceiling, the shapes of the various stand-alone stations and of the railings, the deepened floor. The production designers just continued where they stopped. Eveything is much as on Starfleet ships 200 years later. This could be well the bridge of a sister ship of Voyager if one doesn't look a bit closer.
Posted by The Red Admiral (Member # 602) on :
The bridge has a bit of a cluttered look to it, not something you'd expect from a modern Starfleet vessel, but the general feel and design elements make it look perfect for this ship in the 22nd century. It 'feels' just right, I like it. The one slight drawback is this picture:
The appearance of these monitors look a little too present day for what one may imagine for a starship 150 years from now, but that's the only minor nit.
Posted by targetemployee (Member # 217) on :
From TV Guide "The bridge includes a navigation table and a console [helm] made from a discarded audio mixer from a recording studio; the 1950's-esque joystick, gearshift knobs and steering wheel are a mix of Porshe parts and scrap from Hughes aircraft." (Pg. 29)
I could say a word or two of nastiness on this sentence and its implications. Instead, I will say nothing.
Posted by Tech Sergeant Chen (Member # 350) on :
Anybody notice the panel on the lower right corner of the helm? Looks an awful lot like Kirk's TOS armrest. Wouldn't be surprised if Okuda labeled it the same as an in-joke. The rows of rocker switches recall the original helm.
Speaking of helm, is that the term they'll be using? Are they finally dumping "conn"?
But wait, what's this? The transporter platform is all new? Is this the end of a tradition? They always said with pride that parts of the TOS transporter pads were reused in every Trek transporter since (with the possible exception of the nontraditional DS9).
And I really like the picture of the weapons control station at the bottom of the page. When I designed a ship for a friend several years ago, I did much the same thing for bridge controls. Lots of physicality and variety, a 6-axis control stick like the Spaceball for rotation and translation (almost identical to the one shown here), and no smooth Okudagrams. Wow, GMTA!
Posted by Obese Penguin (Member # 271) on :
I think the bridge looks fine, not to modern , infact one can say it look a bit to "today" for my tastes but I dont really see that as being a make or break point for the show.
On another note... I'm having some serious doubts about this image.
It doesnt look like it fits enterprise. Infact I have a hunch that this is an image from Starship Troopers , if you notice the shoulders on the uniform of the guy down at the left are grey like the uniforms in Starship Troopers and the ship on that monitor looks ALOT like the ships in Starship Troopers.
Thanks to our friends at Babel Fish and Altavista I have this translation of the text on the site next to the image.
quote: Intermediary way was sent us by a reader of our page a further picture of the Enterprise. It shows a console, which is probably for the controlling of the weapons responsible. Cordial thanks at Alex Leiner for this picture!
Hmm Weapons Console ... now if you look down in the right hand corner you will see a hand with a nice nail polish job , now this could be confirmation of Reeds sexual preferance ... j/k
It looks more to me like the ending scene from Starship Troopers where Denise Richard's character gains command of a cruiser. That would be Denise Richard's hand.
Hmm , its happening again I'm becoming a minutae freak! This can only get worse as September Nears :/
Posted by Tech Sergeant Chen (Member # 350) on :
Okay, consider me fooled. Never watched Starship Troopers all the way through. Just too dull and gory for me.
The monitors should have tipped me off. Troopers was made years ago when these were state of the art. I expect Enterprise sets, if they use any CRT screens, would use FD Trinitron or Diamondtron NF tubes with absolutely flat faces. Assuming they don't use active matrix LCDs.
Actually they use plasma screens , $7000 plasma screens , they went all out on this one
I spotted it right off the bat , I saw Starship Troopers a few times (3 times to be exact over a streak of boring Saturday afternoons).
I'm so convinced the creators and production staff of that movie are all closet Nazi's , all the uniforms in that movie look like left SS uniforms , I mean Doogie Howzers character actually wore a TRUE SS uniform , not to mention that SS Skull was everywhere.
[ August 22, 2001: Message edited by: Obese Penguin ]
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
Yeah, looked at my DVD and it's definately from Starshiptroopers (or Berman is as a great fan of STT as of the Akira-Design).
[ August 22, 2001: Message edited by: Spike ]
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
To quote from another thread, "I think we have a winner." Posted by Obi Juan (Member # 90) on :
quote:Speaking of helm, is that the term they'll be using? Are they finally dumping "conn"?
I hope so. If not then we'll throw "conn" onto the growing pile of "It changed by TOS and then changed back again."
Posted by Mr. Christopher (Member # 71) on :
I just watched "Return To Tomorrow" yesterday and I could have swore that Kirk told Sulu to take the conn when he and Spock went down to Sargon's planet...
Posted by Ace (Member # 389) on :
Kirk meant "con" (with one "N"), not CONN. Con is a nautical term that means to direct the steering or course of (a vessel). CONN (or just conn) is a variant of "con" but in Star Trek, seems mainly to be used when someone takes the helm (or flight controller position). Meanwhile, con (last heard in TOS, I believe) has been used as a way to say you have control of the ship/bridge, etc. and not just the helm.
[ August 23, 2001: Message edited by: Ace ]
Posted by MeGotBeer (Member # 411) on :
Chris,
You confusion comes from that you expect "Conn" to refer to the helm/navigation station. It is also used to refer to "taking command." Kirk was not instructing Sulu to jump at the pilot's seat, but to take command of the Enterprise.
Posted by Mr. Christopher (Member # 71) on :
Ouch. My head hurts. Posted by The Red Admiral (Member # 602) on :
I can't believe I didn't recognise this console picture from Starship Troopers. If you look at the monitor near the top you can see a greenish image of the Rodger Young starship. For God's sakes, I was had big time here. D'oh
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
I just noticed... Look at the chair for Sato's station on the right of the big bridge picture. Specifically, the foot of the chair. No wheels! No high-tech feet! Hell, most office chairs look better than that!
If anything, it seems to resemble the chairs from the E-nil. Folks, I think we've found the LINK.
Mark
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
OT: Who the heck was Rodger Young?
/OT: Diane Duane named a Starfleet battleship after him, too, in "The Wounded Sky".
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
quote:Originally posted by Timo: OT: Who the heck was Rodger Young?
The battleship was probably an homage to Heinlein. I've used it myself. I think I even named an Oberth as the USS New Frontiers.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
For the record, "con" and "conn" are just variations of the same word. They both mean "to steer a ship".
Posted by The Red Admiral (Member # 602) on :
According to the Technical Manual, 'Conn' is a term which is short for 'Flight Control'. So Conn in this respect I assume is simply taken from the word 'control'. So 'to steer a ship'? technically speaking yes. But it's more of a physical post, or station, so when someone says, "take the Conn" it basically means 'take the flight control' - or 'take the helm'.
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
I like the bridge and the helm station. It looks like the helm station has a little 'astrogator' to the right. And look at the science console: Spock's viewer is back!
I just hope this bridge has good sound fx!
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
I dunno.. I actually don't like the single forward station concept. Thorugh TOS unto the 2250s, all starship bridges had dedicated helm and navigation stations. Now, Mayweather apparently gets to drive this ship all himself? Talk about belittling Chekov.
Mark
Posted by MeGotBeer (Member # 411) on :
Well, there could be a seperate Nav station elsewhere on the bridge ... just because it's not right next to the helm post doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
True, there could be a navigation sub-station somewhereo n the bridge - the navigator doesn't HAVE to look at the viewscreen.
Actually, I'm only more concerned about the Captain's view of the main screen... Like the Defiant, the Pre-E helm console is fairly close to the CO chair, and only one step "down". Archer is going to spend seven years commanding the Pre-E while staring at the back of Mayweather's head. OTOH, the main screen could be gargantuan, and the view no worse than at a movie theatre...
Mark
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
Man, you guys either don't pay ANY fucking attention or have the memory capacities of LINT. There's a navigation table on the bridge reminiscnet of the one designed for 2010.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Hey, I LIKE lint..!
Anyway, yes I know about the "navigation table", but that's obviously not going to be used for the actual navigation station at which a crewman will sit plotting courses all day long. I believe the purppose of the table and the area it occupies is the equivalent of the conference room set on TNG/VOY, or the centre area of Ops in DS9. It's the place where eveyone goes to sit and talk and mull stuff over, using the table as a situation/display thing.
What I mean is a dedicated place where someone will sit down and navigate the ship, like Chekov did. There appears to be no such station on the set.
Mark
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
Oh I'd tend to disagree. I mean it is named a "Navigation" (Astrogation?) table. Perhpas it's a throwback to the plotting tables on current naval surface and submarine bridges, with the chart table and vectoring equipment. I can definitely see a crew needing an officer to man that station at all times. I doubt they'd use it for real meetings (huddles maybe). It's too small.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Frankly, I don't miss a seperate navigation station at all. Aside from the occasional "course plotted and laid in, keptin," Chekov never did any actual navigating. He fired phasers, except when Sulu did, and he scanned things, except when Spock did.
Posted by Reginald Barclay (Member # 594) on :
Yeah, but I still liked having two seats in front of the captain. There's nobody for the helmsman/person to turn to and exchange smiles or knowing looks or banter with. Paris always seemed so lonely and isolated. TPTB seem to want it both ways, going back to the past and the future at the same time. Then again, that is Braga's MO.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
I agree. Regardless of the actual usefulness of the navigator's position, it *was* there and I'd have hoped that it wouldn't end up on the list of "things that were, then weren't, then were again". Then there's the whole point of Archer staring at the back of Mayweather's head. At least Sisko had Dax's pretty head to stare at for the longest times.
Mark
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Gosh, how horrible!
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
For all we know there's a 5000 sq foot navigation lab on deck 4 with a crew of fifteen constantly keeping Mayweather advised of the latest sensor telemetry and cross referencing a dedicated navigational computer. Condensing that into a single bridge station would be a big leap forward, no?
Posted by Ryan McReynolds (Member # 28) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mark Nguyen: Regardless of the actual usefulness of the navigator's position, it *was* there and I'd have hoped that it wouldn't end up on the list of "things that were, then weren't, then were again".
I've always believed that the navigator's actual purpose during the original series wasn't navigation (something easily handled by the ship's computer), but bridge experience. It's a post almost always filled by junior officers on their first few tours of duty. It lets them observe the captain and senior officers at work, gives them a useful skill, and even allows them to serve as relief for other stations as needed. It's busywork for young officers on the command track.
If that's accurate, there's not really anything too horrible about there being a helmsman sans navigator in any particular time period.
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
Where is the Nav Table actually located? Can you see it on that 'Ship-Tease' picture?
Posted by Pro. Portside (Member # 390) on :
If someone could be so kind as to post the shot of the bridge from the TV guide the nav table can be seen on the right side of the shot.
It is behind the command chair one steep down (maybe two steeps)
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
You can find the TV Guide scan on the first page of this thread.
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
The Nav Table is under the MSD?
quote:I'm not sure if it's a set element or a design element, but are those track lights on the bridge ceiling? (posted by Siegfried)
Yep, those very cool) track lights are part of the of the bridge design.
[ September 01, 2001: Message edited by: Harry ]
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
Wel, TVGuide calls the thing a "Nav Table" but it hasn't been called that anywhere else, to my knowledge. It's used for a somewhat different purpose in the "Broken Bow" script and the producers have said that the situation room is intended to be used roughly the same way as the Observation Lounge.
The starboard console that's analagous to Hoshi's could be a Nav station, and of course there could be some kind of console(s) still further forward of what we've seen of the bridge thus far.
Posted by MeGotBeer (Member # 411) on :
quote:It's a post almost always filled by junior officers on their first few tours of duty. It lets them observe the captain and senior officers at work, gives them a useful skill, and even allows them to serve as relief for other stations as needed. It's busywork for young officers on the command track.
I can buy that explanation. Navigation is a particularly important skill for a command officer to have -- especially if they want to command a ship at some point. Since the navigator probably only has a job to do when plotting the ship's course and/or changes to that (the helmsman can no doubt control emergency situations alone), he has plenty of time to fill in at whatever station need him.
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
The navigation and helm stations seemed to be capable of controlling more ship's functions than simply flight control. I remember a few TOS episodes that showed the Enterprise's weapons being fired from those stations. I remember another one that had Sulu using his pop-up viewfinder to scan a planet surface.
These features were carried over into TOS movies, too. In The Wrath of Khan, Kirk orders Saavik to call up the Reliant's command console through the navigation station. Sulu targets and fires phasers from the helm. In The Search for Spock, Scotty monitors the automation center from the navigation console (of course, this could have been a special riggin). In The Undiscovered Country, Valeris calls up events in the computer's database from the helm, and Chekov fires torpedos from navigation.
I tend to agree with Ryan, although I'd expand it to say that both the helm and navigation stations are primarily for giving crew members on the command track a chance for bridge duty (with navigation being more so than the helm). Sulu manned the helm and became the captain of the Excelsior. Chekov manned navigation and became the first officer of the Reliant. Then he went back to navigation and seemed to be the second officer of the Enterprise.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Ships and submarines have tables to use for navigating on the surface of the planet. A two-dimensional surface for navigating in space is a very very very stupid idea. Hopefully they've figured that out by now...
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
quote: I remember a few TOS episodes that showed the Enterprise's weapons being fired from those stations.
In fact, I don't think they were ever fired from anywhere else. Aside from the one or two times we see the inside of a phaser control room.
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
Yeah, there didn't seem to be a tactical or security station on the Enterprise's bridge at all in TOS. Sulu and Chekov (or navihelm person of the week) fired the weapons. In "Mirror, Mirror," one of Sulu's consoles is referred to as a security board. Of course, there are two or three stations on the bridge that we don't know what purpose they served. But weapons control didn't seem to be any of their functions.
We didn't actually get a real tactical station on the Enterprise's bridge until she was refit in The Motion Picture. But in The Final Frontier, the station seemed to get demoted to just a set of wall monitors next to the Master Situation station behind Kirk's chair. Then that was broken in two and flanked the Master Situation station in The Undiscovered Control. In both of those movies, they weren't manned (hell, didn't even look like they could accommodate anything more than quick checks).
Add to that, in TOS, it doesn't seem like chief of security was a bridge-level or senior staff-level position at all. But I guess that could be all right since the chief engineer wasn't a bridge-level or senior-staff level position in the first season of The Next Generation.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
quote: But I guess that could be all right since the chief engineer wasn't a bridge-level or senior-staff level position in the first season of The Next Generation.
Well, Scotty was third in command...and the Engineering bridge station seemed pretty important...
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
I'm not saying that Scotty or his bridge station were unimportant. I was just using that example in the context of that series to show that there seems to be some flexibility in what is considered a senior staff or bridge-level position. On Kirk's tenure in TOS, the chief of security wasn't deemed important enough. In TNG, the chief engineer wasn't deemed important enough until LaForge took over that job.
Posted by Mr. Christopher (Member # 71) on :
TSN: Yeah, it'd be neat if they had something like Gune's, uh, thingy in Titan AE.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
Actually the implication was, that based on all the early episodes, the nav/helm guy hit the buttons to fire phasers, then the guys downstairs at the actual banks did the firing. I assume this means they recieved the navigators speed figures, distance, telemetry and desired target from his board, fired and then sent confirmation back up.
Thats why we saw Martine and Tomlinson (surrounded by crewman keeping very busy at equipment) firing phasers in 'Balance of Terror'
And when the guy at the helm hits the button and theres no one down there, nothing happens ('Balance of Terror' again.. Spock had to go to the room and fire the weapons before he saved the phaser crew when Stiles and Tomlinson were down there)
I realize they didnt show this every time phasers fired later , but i dont think they radically changed their weapons between 'Balance' and later episodes. If they did then what would all those phaser specialists do during battle? maybe hide from coolant leaks. But the ship's complement would have gone down without requiring phaser specialists.
This is certainly a good explanation for why the Constitutions staffed 430, then by Star Trek VI (when weapons were refit and more automated) they staffed 300. In ST VI they need less people to fire torpedos too.. notice they didnt have a dozen duys all over the torpedo bay like in ST II on the 1701-no suffix. By TNG phasers were almost all automated so thats why a ship like Voyager wouldnt need as many people as the similarly sized Connies
To back up my point, i think we should listen to the recorded chatter usually present on the bridge and listen for when they page phaser crews. ill see if i have time
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
It's a minor point, but surely the reason it took so many to prep the torpedoes in the Wrath of Khan was the not insignificant amount of damage to the launcher?
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
The torpedo system might also have been intentionally "dumbed down" for training use - every man-serviceable part exposed to scrutiny, every manual override turned into a primary control system. The system seen in TMP could have been more extensively automated (although of course we only saw the user end of it, namely Chekov's console).
As for phaser systems, the performance and reaction time of "phaser crews" was a concern to Kirk back in "The Corbomite Maneuver" already. Presumably there was a long cascade from Kirk's "Fire!" through Sulu's keypress through some unknown steps to the moment a phaser team leader says "Firing!" and presses the actual trigger. Why?
Well, phasers appeared to be really finicky machines back in "Balance of Terror", breaking down after just a few shots. Perhaps a large repair team had to tend to the prissy thing, and a man-in-the-loop would wait until this team told the phaser was safely powered up before deciding whether to fire or abort.
Phasers would grow more reliable by the movie era, yet they need not be completely automated at that time, either. We never saw the Enterprise fire phasers when she was rigged for "a monkey and two trainees"...
Incidentally, where did that 300 crew figure for ST6 come from?
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
Valeris: 'We have a crew of 300 searching their quarters, but the conspirators may be among them'
Granted this is a rounded figure im assuming, just like the commonly used 'crew of over four hundred' on TOS, but it is never really clear whether the Enterprise is fully staffed at that point. But it is clear that it takes significantly less officers to run ships by the 24th century
OTOH, the main screen could be gargantuan, and the view no worse than at a movie theatre...