STAR TREK Size Chart

For everything Star Trek related, that isn't covered by the other forums.
User avatar
FLEETYARD
Legendary LT Commander
Legendary LT Commander
Posts: 158
Joined: Sun Nov 10, 2013 9:16 am

Re: STAR TREK Size Chart

Postby FLEETYARD » Sun Sep 28, 2014 8:20 am

marcnoonan wrote:Hi Fleetyard,
... I've scaled the windows to the same size as the NASA Space Shuttle which gave me a length of 55.16m, but wondered if you wanted to have a go too....please...


I would say yes! Do you also create it in 1/1400?
My Star Trek blog: http://fleetyard.blogspot.de

User avatar
FLEETYARD
Legendary LT Commander
Legendary LT Commander
Posts: 158
Joined: Sun Nov 10, 2013 9:16 am

Re: STAR TREK Size Chart

Postby FLEETYARD » Sun Sep 28, 2014 8:27 am

Owen E Oulton wrote:If I may be picky, the Centaur should be much smaller that you depict. the model used a Reliant bridge module, and was supposed to be scaled to it rather than a full-sized Excelsior saucer. Thus the proper length for the Centaur (not a Centaur class) is only 210 metres.


But the Centaur Class is a modified Excelsior Class!
It would be completely illogical and even unbuildable to take an Excelsior saucer and make it smaller. This would mixed up the heights of the decks! Then the windows would be at the level of the soil, etc.
My Star Trek blog: http://fleetyard.blogspot.de

User avatar
el gato
Fatidical Fleet Admiral
Fatidical Fleet Admiral
Posts: 5927
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2013 8:41 pm
Location: In a land whose boundaries are that of imagination

Re: STAR TREK Size Chart

Postby el gato » Sun Sep 28, 2014 4:17 pm

Let's face it, the Centaur's a mess. It uses an Excelsior saucer, Reliant bridge and Reliant photon torpedo housing. If you scale it to the saucer, does it make sense to have such a large photon torpedo bay? And if you scale it to the bridge, does it make sense to make the saucer so tiny it is practically unusable? It's just a dumb design. Part of the reason I have no desire to build any ship from the frankenfleet. They're all reverse Centaurs to me

Image
RogueWolf wrote:I've sacrificed many dozens (maybe even hundreds) of gummy bears to the dark modeling gods to grant me my wish... but I fear my offerings only amuse them, not appease them.

User avatar
FLEETYARD
Legendary LT Commander
Legendary LT Commander
Posts: 158
Joined: Sun Nov 10, 2013 9:16 am

Re: STAR TREK Size Chart

Postby FLEETYARD » Mon Sep 29, 2014 7:49 am

el gato wrote:... It uses an Excelsior saucer, Reliant bridge and Reliant photon torpedo housing. If you scale it to the saucer, does it make sense to have such a large photon torpedo bay? And if you scale it to the bridge, does it make sense to make the saucer so tiny it is practically unusable?...


That's right. At these problems, I always ask for: What is more plausible?
1. To scale down the saucer? No, because this would mixed up the heights of the decks!.
2. Scale up the Torpedo section? Yes, because it is that what we have seen on TV in the DS9 episode "A Time to Stand".
3. The bridge section: the CGI model of the Centaur class has a Excelsior bridge. If you want you can replace it with a Miranda Bridge and it would look in size. You only have to use the right one. Starcraft has managed this well. He used a 1400 Miranda bridge part for a 1400 Excelsior saucer.
My Star Trek blog: http://fleetyard.blogspot.de

User avatar
FLEETYARD
Legendary LT Commander
Legendary LT Commander
Posts: 158
Joined: Sun Nov 10, 2013 9:16 am

Re: STAR TREK Size Chart

Postby FLEETYARD » Tue Dec 30, 2014 3:33 pm

Here is a update of my size chart with a accurate Jem'Hadar Warship (scan from Star Trek Starship collection) and a colored Romulan Warbird.

Image
Last edited by FLEETYARD on Sun Jul 02, 2017 9:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
My Star Trek blog: http://fleetyard.blogspot.de

User avatar
el gato
Fatidical Fleet Admiral
Fatidical Fleet Admiral
Posts: 5927
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2013 8:41 pm
Location: In a land whose boundaries are that of imagination

Re: STAR TREK Size Chart

Postby el gato » Tue Dec 30, 2014 9:17 pm

I never really thought about how the Warbird compared with the Dominion mega-humongo-large-o-matically-big warship. This is why I like your charts :)
RogueWolf wrote:I've sacrificed many dozens (maybe even hundreds) of gummy bears to the dark modeling gods to grant me my wish... but I fear my offerings only amuse them, not appease them.

User avatar
TrekMD
Can-Do Captain
Can-Do Captain
Posts: 733
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2012 9:57 pm
Location: Coral Gables, FL
Contact:

Re: STAR TREK Size Chart

Postby TrekMD » Wed Dec 31, 2014 2:30 am

That looks really nice! I think the screen evidence makes the Romulan Warbird appear much smaller than it actually is supposed to be.
Medicus ad astra, non laedant...
Image

User avatar
FLEETYARD
Legendary LT Commander
Legendary LT Commander
Posts: 158
Joined: Sun Nov 10, 2013 9:16 am

Re: STAR TREK Size Chart

Postby FLEETYARD » Wed Dec 31, 2014 8:11 am

TrekMD wrote:...I think the screen evidence makes the Romulan Warbird appear much smaller than it actually is supposed to be.


Yes, that's true.
http://fleetyard.blogspot.de/2016/05/th ... rbird.html
I think this impression from TNG "The Neutral Zone" is the only screencap in which you can realize the size:

Image
Last edited by FLEETYARD on Sun Jun 19, 2016 12:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
My Star Trek blog: http://fleetyard.blogspot.de

User avatar
FLEETYARD
Legendary LT Commander
Legendary LT Commander
Posts: 158
Joined: Sun Nov 10, 2013 9:16 am

Re: STAR TREK Size Chart

Postby FLEETYARD » Sun Feb 22, 2015 11:43 am

Here is my actuall Size Chart with the new romulan Shuttle build by Douglas E Graves.

Image
Last edited by FLEETYARD on Sun Jul 02, 2017 9:10 am, edited 1 time in total.
My Star Trek blog: http://fleetyard.blogspot.de

User avatar
el gato
Fatidical Fleet Admiral
Fatidical Fleet Admiral
Posts: 5927
Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2013 8:41 pm
Location: In a land whose boundaries are that of imagination

Re: STAR TREK Size Chart

Postby el gato » Sun Feb 22, 2015 8:20 pm

TrekMD wrote:That looks really nice! I think the screen evidence makes the Romulan Warbird appear much smaller than it actually is supposed to be.


Because they lied to you!

:)

"The Neutral Zone" showed the true size of the Warbird relative to the Galaxy. Some (including me) attributed the size difference to perspective, since we were never shown how far the ships were bow to bow. Later special effects fudged the size of the Warbird, resizing it so that it went from being much larger than the Galaxy class to slightly bigger than the Galaxy class

From "Timespace"
Image

From "The Defector" (the episode also furthered the fudging of the size of the KBOP)
Image
RogueWolf wrote:I've sacrificed many dozens (maybe even hundreds) of gummy bears to the dark modeling gods to grant me my wish... but I fear my offerings only amuse them, not appease them.


Return to “General Trek”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests