This would require that the plans you find be entirely accurate to the miniature. Many aren't.
Saucer-Rim Windows
- Thread starter CuttingEdge100
- Start date
Trevanian
Do you have a link to David Kimble's published drawings?
Do you have a link to David Kimble's published drawings?
I think so, but lots of images have been knocked off those at various times and printed smaller or traced over, so if you don't get the originals I wouldn't vouch for their accuracy.
Hi folks, I've been a lurker here for years but I thought I would weigh in on this discussion.
I have traded a few emails with Andy Probert and according to him the Kimble blueprints are a faithful representation of his design specs. However, the filming model as built does differ in several places. The most obvious are the contours of the secondary hull. I also believe that the ratios of the filming model primary hull top to bottom height and rim thickness to the diameter are smaller than on the Kimble drawings.
To the best of my knowledge, there does not exist a publicly available set of drawings or accurate detailed dimensions taken directly from the filming model.
Without accurate measurements from the filming model, your best bet is to go with the designer's intent and rely on Probert's rec deck drawing which indicates an intended rim thickness of 20'.
I have traded a few emails with Andy Probert and according to him the Kimble blueprints are a faithful representation of his design specs. However, the filming model as built does differ in several places. The most obvious are the contours of the secondary hull. I also believe that the ratios of the filming model primary hull top to bottom height and rim thickness to the diameter are smaller than on the Kimble drawings.
To the best of my knowledge, there does not exist a publicly available set of drawings or accurate detailed dimensions taken directly from the filming model.
Without accurate measurements from the filming model, your best bet is to go with the designer's intent and rely on Probert's rec deck drawing which indicates an intended rim thickness of 20'.
trevanian
Rear Admiral
Much thanks ... and welcome!
Does anybody happen to know who bought the refit miniature? Maybe we can get it digitized or lidar-scanned.
Does anybody know how thick the hull is (top and bottom) and how thick the distance is between each deck?
ZStar,
Rim thickness of 20 feet? Thanks for the data.
CuttingEdge100
ZStar,
Rim thickness of 20 feet? Thanks for the data.
CuttingEdge100
Welcome, ZStar!
Do you mean an outside thickness of 20'? The Rec Deck sketch seems to indicate a 20' being a ceiling to floor height.
DS9Sega,
Okay the Rec Deck is 20 feet from the floor to the ceiling. The rec-room is an usual structure on the ship in that it's two decks basically in one deck (looking at the layout, the grav projector would have to be on the bottom of both decks and would simply cover both decks up to the area where the hull shortens to 1.5 decks and then down to one).
How thick is the spacing between each deck (there are probably various things that run under the floor of one deck and above the other, including the grav plate)? A ballpark figure, or a guesstimate range would be helpful.
CuttingEdge100
Okay the Rec Deck is 20 feet from the floor to the ceiling. The rec-room is an usual structure on the ship in that it's two decks basically in one deck (looking at the layout, the grav projector would have to be on the bottom of both decks and would simply cover both decks up to the area where the hull shortens to 1.5 decks and then down to one).
How thick is the spacing between each deck (there are probably various things that run under the floor of one deck and above the other, including the grav plate)? A ballpark figure, or a guesstimate range would be helpful.
CuttingEdge100
Thanks for the welcome folks.
I believe the intended external rim thickness was 20’ (per the Kimble drawings) with 8’ ceilings (from Probert) on most decks in the primary hull.
Personally, I think a rim thickness closer to 21’ is necessary from an internal arrangement/systems perspective. A problem I have with Probert’s rec deck drawing is that he has the floor and ceiling directly against the hull. For example, as CuttingEdge100 pointed out, if grav-plates are located in the floor then that thickness should be in addition to the lower hull thickness. Another example would be turbo-elevator cars. Surely they must have some structural or tech hardware that extends below floor level. That implies a significant space between the floor of one deck and the ceiling below. Otherwise we would see the shafts cutting into the overhead space in rooms and corridors.
As I indicated in my previous post, the rim of the filming model may scale out less than 20’. That is my assessment from analyzing photos that are admittedly lower res than I would prefer.
I believe the intended external rim thickness was 20’ (per the Kimble drawings) with 8’ ceilings (from Probert) on most decks in the primary hull.
Personally, I think a rim thickness closer to 21’ is necessary from an internal arrangement/systems perspective. A problem I have with Probert’s rec deck drawing is that he has the floor and ceiling directly against the hull. For example, as CuttingEdge100 pointed out, if grav-plates are located in the floor then that thickness should be in addition to the lower hull thickness. Another example would be turbo-elevator cars. Surely they must have some structural or tech hardware that extends below floor level. That implies a significant space between the floor of one deck and the ceiling below. Otherwise we would see the shafts cutting into the overhead space in rooms and corridors.
As I indicated in my previous post, the rim of the filming model may scale out less than 20’. That is my assessment from analyzing photos that are admittedly lower res than I would prefer.
Exactly. And modern lift manufacturers take pride in building lift shafts that don't have an inch of unnecessary width beyond the dimensions of the cab itself, because this is what the customers desperately want. Very complex mechanisms are sometimes created to avoid even having the extra shaft width that the counterweight would require.
I'd think one of the main attributes for the turbolift network would be that the shafts are indeed almost completely devoid of machinery, and that everything needed is located either in the cabs themselves or perhaps in some central locations that distribute the goods (power, guidance, lubrication, whatnot) via almost unnoticeably slim connections. It would be an important benefit of the system that the shafts could be installed almost anywhere, and quickly taken down and rerouted if need be (such as with the door locations we see changing between the various TOS movies).
Timo Saloniemi
I'd think one of the main attributes for the turbolift network would be that the shafts are indeed almost completely devoid of machinery, and that everything needed is located either in the cabs themselves or perhaps in some central locations that distribute the goods (power, guidance, lubrication, whatnot) via almost unnoticeably slim connections. It would be an important benefit of the system that the shafts could be installed almost anywhere, and quickly taken down and rerouted if need be (such as with the door locations we see changing between the various TOS movies).
Timo Saloniemi
I guess it comes down to a matter of personal preference. I am reluctant to rely too heavily on seemingly magical tech solutions. We see significant wall thicknesses in all Trek series. I assume a similar floor/ceiling thickness with embedded piping and wiring. I know that Scott’s Guide shows a nice corridor cross section with a lot of piping and power conduits neatly placed in the walls. But… I’ve got to ask what happens to all that “plumbing” at a doorway? It must go somewhere and the only options are over or under.
I think the comparison of a TE car to a conventional elevator has its limitations. A TE car must be much more capable under emergency conditions. It must be air tight and structurally sound in a vacuum. It probably has some limited life support capability and therefore requires a built in power source. Batteries would suffice. In TMP we see the shadow of a TE car in a cargo bay shaft. It has excessively rounded ends, about 2’ above and below the ceiling and floor respectively. I think 4-6” for the car walls, floor, and ceiling are a minimum. Since no one ever steps up into a car that implies some allowance for below floor clearance in the horizontal shafts.
This is one of those Trek tech areas that is sufficiently vague that it is open to a great deal of personal preference and interpretation.
I think the comparison of a TE car to a conventional elevator has its limitations. A TE car must be much more capable under emergency conditions. It must be air tight and structurally sound in a vacuum. It probably has some limited life support capability and therefore requires a built in power source. Batteries would suffice. In TMP we see the shadow of a TE car in a cargo bay shaft. It has excessively rounded ends, about 2’ above and below the ceiling and floor respectively. I think 4-6” for the car walls, floor, and ceiling are a minimum. Since no one ever steps up into a car that implies some allowance for below floor clearance in the horizontal shafts.
This is one of those Trek tech areas that is sufficiently vague that it is open to a great deal of personal preference and interpretation.
DS9Sega,
Actually in Mr Scott's guide to the enterprise, from what I remember they were not a thin foil. They would have been thicker. Maybe an inch to a few inches?
ZStar,
I'd say about 4-9 inches below the rec-deck and 4 to 9 inches above the rec-deck were counted as skin thickness with 240 (20-feet) inches counted within the skin... I could be wrong (I looked at Andy Probert's drawing). I'm not sure if the skin thickness being that little is entirely a good idea.
I have given some thought and if you made the skin 16-inches thick (which seems sufficient for most purposes), shaving off 16 inches (eight off the top and eight off the bottom) still gives you 9'4" a deck. In the main corridors the ceiling is about 8 feet high... That leaves 16 inches for stuff in the ceiling, a gap between the decks, a grav-plate and everything.
CuttingEdge100
Actually in Mr Scott's guide to the enterprise, from what I remember they were not a thin foil. They would have been thicker. Maybe an inch to a few inches?
ZStar,
I'd say about 4-9 inches below the rec-deck and 4 to 9 inches above the rec-deck were counted as skin thickness with 240 (20-feet) inches counted within the skin... I could be wrong (I looked at Andy Probert's drawing). I'm not sure if the skin thickness being that little is entirely a good idea.
I have given some thought and if you made the skin 16-inches thick (which seems sufficient for most purposes), shaving off 16 inches (eight off the top and eight off the bottom) still gives you 9'4" a deck. In the main corridors the ceiling is about 8 feet high... That leaves 16 inches for stuff in the ceiling, a gap between the decks, a grav-plate and everything.
CuttingEdge100
Last edited:
^^^ Andy Probert's web site describes this well. The this drawing was probably done before the rec deck set design was far along. Probert was trying to show Harold Michaelson, the set designer, that he would have to contend with the undercut. He had to do it in a delicate way because of the separation of responsibilities within the production staff. Michaelson dismissed Probert's concerns by basically saying no one would ever notice...
ZStar,
At least on the bright side, the rec-deck (2 decks at the rim, 1 decks further in and 1.5 decks in between) can fit within the confines of the hull as I described.
At least on the bright side, the rec-deck (2 decks at the rim, 1 decks further in and 1.5 decks in between) can fit within the confines of the hull as I described.
With all respect to Shane Johnson, I don't give any credence to what that books says. It doesn't even get the airlock 4 room shape right.
The proportions are off, for one (the spacesuit lockers are too small). His version features a completely fabricated wall opposite where the corridor comes in, putting a docking ring style door on a vertical wall there, when the actual set features a slanted wall mirroring the side with the spacesuits. Also, the actual set features what appears to be a bench directly across from the corridor, right where Shane's blueprint shows that docking ring door. These details are visible in the Kirk suiting up scene.
Image 1 at Trekcore
Image 2 at Trekcore
Last edited:
Similar threads
