Flare Sci-Fi Forums: Defiant size/layout solution

This is topic Defiant size/layout solution in forum Starships & Technology at Flare Sci-Fi Forums.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://flare.solareclipse.net/ultimatebb.php/topic/6/301.html

Posted by Jim Phelps (Member # 102) on :

I was revising my Defiant page when I thought of something. What if the Defiant's MSD is constantly set to a fancy 133% "interior zoom-in" mode, in which the ship's outline doesn't change size onscreen? Here's what would happen upon zooming out:

1) Deck 4 would shift to the ship's actual bottom surface (Deck 3 in the MSD). Since this deck now exists at the centerline and not in just the port/starboard sections, the aft torpedo launcher need not be split into two for balance. Checks out with the dialogue/VFX which suggest only one aft centerline launcher.

2) The warp core would not be hanging in outer space as it does now on Deck 4, assuming a placement at the centerline.

3) There is no need to postulate further shuttlebays, as the bay depicted in the MSD would move up to the ship's bottom and slightly forward into the circular area.

4) The impulse engines would also move slightly forward and into the red-glowing areas where they belong.

5) The overall ship would have six 8-10' decks, as indicated by the turbolift plaque and dialogue references. Rick built this configuration into the four-deck Raven, mentioning that it's a standard for smaller ships.

6) Those rows of 'windows' on the underside could actually stand for 6-foot subdecks 5 and 6.

This solution would somewhat reflect the real-world occurence of a) Drexler making the obvious mistake with the warp core and correcting it later for the manual b) the likely misunderstandings regarding the ship's bottom which resulted in so many Deck 4 MSD locations assigned to MSD's Deck 3 by the writers and the VFX people.

What's in these surrounding areas? Probably nothing too interesting. Ablative armor and similar shielding devices? I'd very much appreciate it if some of you PaintShopPro wizards could fit the MSD into a Defiant side schematic according to the above description. The MSD needs to be about 3/4ths of the length of the schematic, and should ideally be aligned with impulse engines and the shuttlebay.

Boris

[This message has been edited by Boris (edited June 26, 1999).]

Posted by bryce (Member # 42) on :

By Joe, I think he got it!

------------------
I love Zilla's lips ! ;)

Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :

Who's Joe?

------------------
"Breath...keep breathing. I can't do this alone"
--
Radiohead

Posted by Jim Phelps (Member # 102) on :

Well it's obviously Joe Straczynski...

Boris

------------------
"Wrong again. Although we want to be scientifically accurate, we've found that selection of [Photon Energy Plasma Scientifically Inaccurate as a major Star Trek format error] usually indicates a preoccupation with science and gadgetry over people and story."

---a Writers' Test from the Original Series Writer's Guide

Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :

Joe Straczynski? Perish the thought, man!

I think that the lad has hit the nail on the head. I'd like to see the new revised MSD if any of the PaintShopPro masters could spent some time reworking it.

------------------
"Some people call me the Space Cowboy. Yeah! Some call me the Gangster of Love. Some people call me Maurice. Whoo hoo! 'Cause I speak of the Pompatus of Love!" - Steve Miller Band's The Joker

Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :

Something like this?

I haven't checked the impulse and shuttle positions against a regular diagram. The shuttle looks a little far back, but it may not be stored directly on top of the tractor beam, er... bay doors. :-)

------------------
"You! Are you smarter than this one?"
-Ambassador Byleth to LaForge regarding Worf, TNG's "Liasons"

Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :

Dang, Tim. That's good, quick work. Does this mean I have to respect you now?

Posted by Jim Phelps (Member # 102) on :

That's good, Tim, perhaps the scale of the inner diagram should be slightly lower, until the exhaust opening of the impulse engines aligns with the aft torpedo launcher "gun-point" - that's where the real impulse engines are. But yes, this is about it.

Boris

[This message has been edited by Boris (edited June 29, 1999).]

Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :

Actually, rather than changing the scale again, couldn't the engines just be shifted forward? We can assume that, on the MSD, they've been moved relatively back to make room for other stuff (the warp core, for instance...).

------------------
"You! Are you smarter than this one?"
-Ambassador Byleth to LaForge regarding Worf, TNG's "Liasons"

Posted by Jim Phelps (Member # 102) on :

TSN: Well, one possibility is to disregard the MSD placements completely because they could be arbitrary, as for ease of reference by the engineers. This is also a nice explanation, but I would rather try and fit everything as close as possible to a zoom-theory at this point.

Using your example, I made another version of the reworked MSD. The engines and the pulse phaser cannons were placed with respect to the exterior locations shown in the Fact Files schematics. The shuttlebay doesn't work, but it can be rationalized as the shuttle storage room as opposed to the actual bay (seen and mentioned in the DS9 tech manual). The scale should be about right; this is what a 170m Defiant should ideally look like, if it were not for the possibility that every deck is 8-10' tall. It all depends on the size of the actual sets, however.

Boris

---a Writers' Test from the Original Series Writer's Guide