Star Trek USS Enterprise Reimagined Final

[gmd3d]

Most us "CGI modellers" and 2d artist like to try their hand at tweaking the classic Enterprise design, this is mine and I finally finished it for the last time recently, I started the bloody thing in 2017.
(But really in 2012, before other projects took focus)

I increased the scale from 947ft to 1311.5ft but retained the overall design approach only tweaking the surface details docking hatches and lighting like the Refit.

I worked on a fleet of Federation ships (I will post them in the future) I am moving tomorrow on to the Romulan's and perhaps Klingon's designs still keeping in the TOS era.

as this image is large I am hosting it on my Blog.

https://gmd3ddesigns.files.wordpress...prise-2020.png

[Darrell Lawrence]

I like what you did with it.

Was it your re-do or the original that you made in your Tutorial?

[gmd3d]

Originally Posted by Darrell Lawrence

I like what you did with it.

Was it your re-do or the original that you made in your Tutorial?

Thanks.

The classic Enterprise was a rebuild after the tutorial. 2015/16 perhaps.
My reworked one was started in 2017 once I started to try building the design to scale, hangar bay and all the other fun stuff. but mainly the hanger bay. impossible to fit it to the model, shuttles so knowing if I rescaled the classic there would annoy some fans. so easier just to reimagine it so things do fit with the same overall design.

I added the additional detail to the Warp engines where it connects to the support structure to clearly show differences between both designs.

I think the classic should be at least 1311.5ft. (Looking at the master systems display MSD in Star Trek Enterprise Constitution-class schematics created by Doug Drexler for ENT: "In a Mirror, Darkly, Part II"
has 26 decks and a friend suggests that it is even larger than my rescale. 26 decks and almost 1500ft long (I looked at this a little and it would fix everything to a tee,.

[Darrell Lawrence]

I kinda dis-like using decks to help determine size, as some decks are different sizes to others, and ship-to-ship they can be different sizes as well.

[gmd3d]

Originally Posted by Darrell Lawrence

I kinda dis-like using decks to help determine size, as some decks are different sizes to others, and ship-to-ship they can be different sizes as well.

Another person I encountered is of the same view, I never cared for the different sizes I did look at that myself at the start, one of the key areas I wanted to work was having hatches and corridors to the sides of the Hangar deck, you cannot have them at the forward area of the hangar as behind that is the engineering area or should be.

I also used 10ft as a baseline for most of the ship, keeps in the visual look I like from the show, some decks in the secondary hull are taller, in the dorsal neck and engineering section that I see as structural

[Darrell Lawrence]

I thought at one point you were using a 6 foot tall character model to help figure out the sizes.

[gmd3d]

Originally Posted by Darrell Lawrence

I thought at one point you were using a 6 foot tall character model to help figure out the sizes.

To start with yes, and it was always there to check how things looked in relation with each section I focused on, by no means my rescale project is definitive but for me its a far more workable scale, than the accepted canon of 947ft

Franz Joseph blueprints while great, They don't work. he has the engine room in the primary hull, the hangar deck cuts through the area that the Engine room infrastructure should be, the Bridge is 36 degree offset to the port-side I never liked that, makes no sense.
but he was working from the same source as everyone else has since 1968, "The Making of Star Trek" by Stephen E. Whitfield (Poe) and the design/drawing Matt Jefferies made for the AMT model kit.

To my knowledge, Franz Joseph only spoke to Gene Roddenberry, not to the nuts and bolts man, Walter M. Jefferies, who was possibly working on other shows it was 1973/4

[Darrell Lawrence]

IIRC, the bridge was off-set at an angle because of the turbo lift - The lift was lined up directly to the neck.

[gmd3d]

Originally Posted by Darrell Lawrence

IIRC, the bridge was off-set at an angle because of the turbo lift - The lift was lined up directly to the neck.

Yes I know, it was the original configuration for the bridge, having the elevator directly behind the Captain's chair, but finding it was not great for camera angle setups it was moved to the left,

The series details were in flux, and they never expected us 50+ years later looking at how things worked, but when you go in and try to make things work, they don't and it's quite a small space taking into account hull thickness, then the thickness of the turbo elevator car (I did not even try to think about that). but overall I have the hull thickness of 1ft minimum.

I started the rescale project in 2017 (well really 2012, but other projects pulled me away). hours of research and head-scratching.

[Darrell Lawrence]

Yeah, I vaguely recall reading about why the turbo lift was located where it was - They wanted the camera to have multi characters in the shot, with the Captain able to turn just a bit to see who was coming out of the lift.

I've always liked the idea that the bridge doesn't sit straight in the saucer. Gives a different feel. I mean... the bridge isn't window based, so it's orientation didn't matter at all.

[gmd3d]

Originally Posted by Darrell Lawrence

Yeah, I vaguely recall reading about why the turbo lift was located where it was - They wanted the camera to have multi characters in the shot, with the Captain able to turn just a bit to see who was coming out of the lift.

I've always liked the idea that the bridge doesn't sit straight in the saucer. Gives a different feel. I mean... the bridge isn't window based, so it's orientation didn't matter at all.

I am the opposite, I dislike it and regardless of the Starship special qualities, artificial gravity, inertial dampener etc,

I think a pilot (and Matt Jefferies being a WW2 pilot) would like to sit facing the direction of travel, even with instrumentation your instincts would be off-kilter, 36° off. it feels wrong, even in a weightless environment

I would ask why this approach was not continued in later starships like the refit.

I think the idea 2 elevator first appeared in STTAS I know its not considered canon (I think it should).