posted
I recently e-mailed Gary Hutzel, who designed the Defiant along with Jim Martin and Tony Meininger (as you can read in the DS9 Companion, he and Meininger developed the final shape based on Lamborghinis and a few other cars, using a sketch of Martin's for reference). Even before the Defiant as we know it was developed, Hutzel established its size at 171m or 560 feet (1.5 times the size of a BoP = 540 plus 20 feet to make the number look good). I suppose that's why we see two rows of windows where Drexler has only one deck -- Meininger added these.
This shouldn't have anything to do with a serious argument, and I had argued against the accepted MSD layout before. Here is the problem. If we look at the data from an intention-based POV, then yes, 120m looks good, feels right as compromise and satisfies the average viewer who doesn't look too closely. However, looking at it scientifically, as is usually done in these forums, it no longer makes sense.
We cannot simply assume that the average of comparisons is correct -- we need more reliable ways of scaling the ship. The best possible way is to use the escape pod sequence in "Valiant", where we actually see the exact relationship between the rear pods and their hatches that are painted on the actual studio model. Assuming the reused Intrepid pods are 3.5m wide as designed by Rick Sternbach, the Defiant scales out to 150 +/- 10m.
Then we look at the two rows of windows. Ok, we've seen exactly one window inside the Defiant, but what reason is there to suppose they're not windows? Drexler has about 1.2 decks (Deck 4 and the crawlspace) where the two rows are -- if his layout scales out to 110m, we get roughly 180m for ours; consistent with the evidence above, and more reliable than the VFX. (And it's two rows, not three -- the recent DS9 calendar picture by Hutzel clearly distinguishes between rows of windows and other lights in the area.)
Then we come to the MSD. Does it make sense to prefer that layout over the characters' lines in "Starship Down" that clearly indicate that Deck 2 is not where the Engineering is, and that the entire ship must henceforth have at least four decks in the middle instead of three (with the Engineering being on Deck 3 at least, at least one more deck is required for the lower portion of the warp core). The three instances of "Deck 5" dialogue support this notion. If even the deck count in the MSD is incorrect, do we have any reason to trust the 110m scale derived from it?
We need to look for other evidence to determine the layout. There is a turbolift plaque that indicates the presence of six decks where Drexler has three. Surprisingly, it fits quite nicely, and was probably drawn up based on the 171m size some time before the MSD. The directory on the plaque is still a bit problematic, but the deck count is consistent with the dialogue. Deck 6 would also be the first row of windows, with a possible Deck 7 in the second row. However, since the rest of the schematic is not quite accurate, we really can prove only five decks. Still, it fits the other important evidence, and must be preferred over the MSD.
In conclusion: there are definitely at least five decks on the ship, and the ship is 150m long if the pods are 3.5m wide. Since 150m is so close to 171m, the design size, what reason is there not to accept 171m? The majority of VFX shots that suggest 60-120m? How do we know that the majority is correct? The MSD that suggests 110m? The MSD is incorrect.
[ February 25, 2002, 09:29: Message edited by: Boris ]
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
1) Given the varying size of the Defiant in known pre-production materials, and general unreliability/bad memory of the people involved with the show, I don't think we should put much emphasis on whatever they're saying these days.
2) How do you know the escape pods are Intrepid sized? Why do they have to be windows? Why are the characters considered infallible in what they say? Etc.
3) Turbolift plaque?
4) Science is based on analysis of data. If the majority of data suggests something, then the majority is in fact correct.
I'd be more impressed if you found scenes where the Defiant is undeniably 170m based on objects in the scene whose lengths are extremely well-known. At this point, I'll hint that such scenes have a non-zero probability of existing.
In the meantime, I'm back to writing x86 assembly programs. nop, nop, nop!
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
1) Gary Hutzel not only was involved in design stages and model construction, but he also supervised the effects in just about every other episode of the entire DS9 show. This would be similar to questioning Andrew Probert about the revised Enterprise. Like Hutzel and Meininger, Probert finished the revised Enterprise design.
2) The pods are Intrepid sized because they're the Intrepid pods. No other pods were available in LightWave. If they're furthermore roughly consistent with the 560' size that Stipes, who supervised the show, claims to have used, no reason to make them smaller.
4) Science is based on critical interpretations of data. The Defiant is roughly 200m long in every shot with the Nebula, Excelsior and Yeager docked at DS9. Since we cannot average things or make arbitrary judgements on which shots are correct, the way to find out is to make structural measurements.
As for the dialogue, it's downright impossible that both Dax and Sisko have flubbed on three occassions by mentioning a Deck 5, and that Crewman Stevens would mention hull generators "compensating for the hull breach on Deck 2" while standing on the same deck, or that O'Brien wouldn't check up on the Deck 1 people right after the bridge was hit by climbing up the ladder, or that Worf would take the Jefferies Tube instead of the ladder from Deck 1 to Deck 2. You only need to rewatch "Starship Down."
[ February 25, 2002, 10:23: Message edited by: Boris ]
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
I'm keeping the Defiant at 120m. This is mostly because, after so many discussions in which a clear image of the 120m Defiant formed, the argument that 171m was intended doesn't change that much (or at least that is what I keep telling myself).
I think that Hutzel intentionally did not include any external details that could help determine the size. The size may still have been subject to debates, and maybe it should have been left to the writers and/or VFX people (a bad objective, of course).
-------------------- Bernd Schneider
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
The argument is not that it was intended -- I merely suggest the traditional recourse of using the design size if it fits other evidence, especially since there is a small uncertainty in the escape pod measurements.
Part of the problem is that this clearest, structural escape pod evidence came up after everyone became tired discussing the ship based on just the VFX and the MSD, without realizing the uncertainty range in the VFX or the inaccuracies in the MSD. Another issue is that of approach -- one can argue for a more commonsense approach based on what the average viewer would see -- after all, you're not supposed to look closely at a TV show and accept certain errors; that's the nature of the medium. However, given that the tendency here is to go beyond the obvious into Okudagrams, distant ships and such, it also makes sense to go beyond the VFX and the MSD into other areas such as dialogue and indirect scaling evidence.
I'm not trying to explain these uncertainties and errors -- the idea is to focus on that which is fairly certain, namely the 5+ deck count and the size of the Intrepid pods, while leaving out the unexplained dramatic variations that occur with a lot of ships with or without reliable scale indicators.
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
There is also the Defiant shuttlebay to consider. It only clicked recently that the shuttle launch scene in "The Sound of Her Voice" is showing an internal deck structure, from the outside of the ship! Going by Drexlers design of the shuttlebay (as seen as a pic in DS9TM, and a CGI render in Magazine issue 22), the shallow dome on the bottom of the Defiant is the base of the shuttlebay. It also shows that the dome is a unique deck (which just happens to line up with the first row of windows). We can see that the railing of the shuttlebay upperdeck is roughly level with the normal Defiant centreline. So, using the traditional MSD layout, the shuttlebay is on deck 4 and the upper bay level is on deck 3. Of course, all this really shows is that the ship is much bigger than what the MSD indicates - more likely >5 decks at the intended 560'. And lets not forget the size of the Chaffee itself.
[ February 26, 2002, 05:27: Message edited by: Dax ]
Hopefully, this will show that the size varies over such a wide range that it will no longer be possible to think that the average will do one any good. I merely need to find as many 170m and 70m numbers as 120-130m figures.
[ February 26, 2002, 18:35: Message edited by: Boris ]
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
It doesn't impact the measuremeant but the Defiant is above a Galor, not a Keldon, in "Defiant". In the episode the Galor is protecting the Defiant from the Keldons.
posted
Corrected (BTW, the schematics are from your site, some of the pictures are from Maximum Defiant, etc.) I'll add credits and links to individual pages tomorrow. This thing is nowhere near public yet, just working on the most important stuff first.
[ February 26, 2002, 19:39: Message edited by: Boris ]
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
