Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Sci-Fi
»
Designs, Artwork, & Creativity
»
Misc. TOS stuff
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by MinutiaeMan: [QB] Okay, I've got a few additions: I took a moment to measure Harry's diagram, which I'm treating as the representative given that it's got the most precise resolution (therefore decreasing the need for me to estimate dimensions), even though some of the proportions may be slightly off. I don't think it's by much more than a few meters. [i](Anal-retentive analysis follows...)[/i] ;) Measured from the inner edge of both clamshell doors (where it visibly disappears into the hull, I measured a distance of 176 pixels, which translates to 73.95 meters (at a scale of 238 px/100 m). Given the constant width of the secondary hull, I assume that the internal through-deck can be the full width available for the entire length. (I'll ignore for now any internal structural issues. The full width of the secondary hull is 55 pixels, translating to 23.11 meters at the same scale listed above. A generous allowance of only one meter of wall space for the hull and equipment on each side (and ignoring the obvious curvature of the secondary hull towards the ceiling) provides a total hangar dimension of approximately 74 meters by 21 meters. According to the dimensions provided in FJ's tech manual (which I'm using mainly because it was the authoritative text of the time, and the dimensions are perfectly reasonable) the TOS shuttlecraft was 6.9 meters long and 4.33 meters wide. Increase those dimensions by approximately one meter for both dimensions to allow for some clearance of movement, both for the shuttles themselves and for people walking among the ships. This gives a minimum allowance of 7.9 meters by 5.33 meters per shuttlecraft. Assuming the hangar bay is a constant width for the entire length, the width of the bay is approximately 3.96 shuttlecraft widths. (Call it 4... I'm feeling generous.) Now, you can't allow the entire hangar length, though, because there needs to be a launch/landing area closest to each of the doors. I was originally going to allow the landing area to reside primarily in the clamshell door area like FJ depicts in his floor plan of the Enterprise's shuttlebay... however, everything I remember about the TOS hangar operations imply that the entire shuttlebay had to decompress when the doors opened, and that a large atmospheric forcefield hadn't been implemented at that point. (In case I'm wrong, I'll include the figures for the additional space in {braces}.) The landing area in FJ's shuttlebay was 11.4 meters long, from the outermost point of the clamshell doors to the approximate point where the hangar control rooms are indicated on the diagram. Assuming that the entire area is walled off in the Coronado and functions as a sort of "airlock" for the shuttlecraft before they launch or return to the hangar proper, approximately 2.5 meters would need to be subtracted from each end of the Coronado's hangar bay, for a total loss of 5 meters. Therefore, a total of 69 meters of deck length is available for the hangar bay proper. {74 meters otherwise.} That's 8.73 {9.37} shuttlecraft lengths with clearance between included. Since you can't dock just part of a shuttlecraft, these figures have to be rounded down to 8 {9}. Therefore, with a maximum capacity of 4 shuttles across the width and 8 {9} across the length, you get somewhere between 32 and 36 shuttlecraft as the Coronado's maximum possible capacity. [b]Commentary and Interpretation:[/b] Although the 32/36 figure is the maximum that could fit assuming a clear shuttlecraft deck, this figure is highly unlikely given practical engineering considerations. -- First, you've got to consider the need to move shuttles around, and that all of the shuttles are identical and in perfect condition. There's no accounting for maneuvering space in my calculations. -- Second, these figures make no account for supporting equipment inside the shuttlebay for which craft can be maintained. Sure, a lot of the equipment can be portable in the advanced technological era of TOS (even before the "magical" equipment in TNG), but there's still got to be some need for maintaining shuttlecraft in a ship that's a dedicated carrier. And what about the possibility of a "machine shop" in the deck below the hangar as indicated in the FJ manuals, and used the turntable/elevator in the shuttlebay? Again, packing so many craft in lessens the availability of space for other equipment. -- Third, the TOS shuttlecraft is hardly the most practical craft for non-generalized operations. There's no indication that the shuttle was armed at all (that I can recall), and its small size makes it highly impractical for any large-scale evacuation operations. In both cases, a larger craft means that fewer can be fitted inside the hangar. (For comparison, [URL=http://www.starfleet-museum.org/alburak.htm]Masao's fighters[/URL] would be hopelessly oversized: only 6 Puffins or 4 Penguins!) -- Fourth, there's no accounting for internal structures necessary for the starship itself. You need structural supports for the mass of the nacelles (because even a strong shell is not a structurally sound arrangement), and power/supply/resource conduits, not to mention some way for crew members to get between the upper levels and the decks below the hangar itself. And this doesn't even account for the necessary warp plasma transfer conduits to get the power from wherever the warp core is located to the nacelle pylons. To sum up, all of these issues combined convince me that the Coronado design is highly impractical and ill-conceived. As I stated in my last post, it seems the primary intent of this design was to mimic the appearance of the original Enterprise as much as possible. There are so many changes that could be made to make this design better... mounting the nacelles from the lower part of the secondary hull (kinda like the Belknap class, I guess, though I hate that ship) so that they're closer to the (possible) location of the warp core; expanding the secondary hull to allow for larger hangar space and support; or even [i]inverting[/i] the secondary hull so that the hangar is mounted on the very bottom of the ship and the engineering equipment is above that (although that would cause some problems of its own, most likely). ...So. Do you think I've beaten this topic to death yet? ;) :o [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3