• U.S.S. Excelsior - Star Trek III Seven-Foot Version

That's six rows of windows, and this configuration works out to 16.0 decks in the secondary hull, which is similar to the 18 decks of Doug Drexler's Ent-B MSD. It gives us a spacing of 7.8 feet per deck, determined by comparing the secondary hull height to the overall length on this rough model photo of the STIII version. While 7.8 feet per deck is sorta possible, it is much more likely that the ILM chart showing the 467 meters was only preliminary, and that the ship was supposed to be somewhat bigger in the final version. The ship is reportedly scaled much bigger than 467m next to Ent-A in Star Trek VI, which supports the idea.

Now, take a look at this:

• Commercial Replica of Greg Jein's Five-footer made for Flashback, VOY

That's only four rows of windows, pointing to the existence of only 12.2 decks in the sec hull at 10.2 feet per deck. The question is, why would Greg Jein alter the appearance of the seven-footer? Consistency with the Encyclopedia? Possible, but a more likely explanation is that the six rows of windows seen on the STIII photo are not present on the actual miniature, and were composited over in the movie. That would explain why no Excelsior diagram ever shows the windows. When Greg Jein needed to add the holes on his version, he naturally used the 467m size to determine deck spacing.

Opinions, screencaps etc. would be appreciated.

Boris

[This message has been edited by Boris (edited August 21, 1999).]

The question is, does the Flashback miniature have the same window configuration as the ST VI seven-footer? Hmm...

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

------------------
Elim Garak: "Oh, it's just Garak. Plain, simple Garak. Now, good day to you, Doctor. I'm so glad to have made such an... interesting new friend today." (DS9: "Past Prologue")

The ST:VI Excelsior definately has the same amount of windows as the ST:III one (I've got VI on DVD). The Ent-B model seems to have less windows in engineering although it is the same thing. Some windows appear to be removed/filled or never really existed (like Boris suggested). The 'Flashback' model replicates the rows of windows on the Ent-B, except the latter is missing the row where the decal is.

I would postulate that the original Excelsior was intended to have 26 decks -

8 in the saucer down to the neck
6 in the neck
12 for the rest.

It should be longer than 467m to give reasonable deck heights. I did some calcs and about 530m would be fitting. Unfortunately, the ship usually appears in the shows as 467m rather than the ST:VI size.

Oh, I find it hard to believe they gave the Ent-B deflector room as Deck 15 - that's way too small. I would say ~Deck 21.

------------------
"Forgive me if I don't share your euphoria!" (Weyoun to Dukat, DS9 'Tears of the Prophets')

[This message has been edited by Dax (edited August 22, 1999).]

[This message has been edited by Dax (edited August 22, 1999).]

I agree with your count, except that ILM definitely composited a greater number of windows on the sec hull for STIII. I personally don't have a problem with 7.8' decks in a section we've never seen from the inside, while 10' per decks (at 467 meters) was quite common in the old days, no need to change it.

Deck 15, Section 21-alpha is where the deflector room is located, I checked that one. If the secondary hull of the Ent-B shows 12 decks, then the neck decks should probably be more widely spaced to compensate.

Boris

I wasn't disputing the Deck 15 quote, but I reckon the movie producers erred.

I truly hate the 467m length. It's just too damn small. It makes most of the decks horribly small. Try calculating the diameter of the bridge, or the height of the 4 lowest/ventral saucer decks. See my point?

------------------
"Forgive me if I don't share your euphoria!" (Weyoun to Dukat, DS9 'Tears of the Prophets')

[This message has been edited by Dax (edited August 23, 1999).]

This leads me to believe that ILM pastes windows onto the ship in a consistent configuration, one which Greg Jein ignored when he did the holes on his five-footer. While ILM works with a larger size, the shows have somehow adopted the older 467 meters and fewer decks in the secondary hull.

The saucer windows are spaced 4 feet apart at 467 meters, and wouldn't really make sense even if the ship were 1000 meteres long - I'd make them both a part of one deck, as a sort of special viewing ports.

I really have to see images of the "Flashback", STVI and ST:Gen versions of the Excelsior at this point. Doesn't the Ent-B have the windows in exactly the same spots as the STIII and STVI Excelsiors, if we forget for the moment the ones covered up by the new section?

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

[This message has been edited by Boris (edited August 23, 1999).]

Has anyone ever been ambitious enough to compare the Excelsior size to other ships in DS9 episodes? In 'Tears of the Prophets' there appears to be an Excelsior that is longer than a Vor'cha.

saucer: 8 to neck, 4 below, 12 total
neck: 6

Sorry, I haven't thought about specific numbers of decks, but since Deck 15 is located almost at the bottom of the ship, the neck or the saucer might have comparatively greater deck spacing to account for the low number.

As for the rest, I suppose that windows in certain sections might be off from time to time, although that still doesn't explain the completely different *pattern* of arrangement (not window plus/minus) on the Flashback miniature. I'm not sure how we're going to fix the problem if the ST VI version arrangement is inconsistent with the Flashback arrangement.

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