# Space Station Jefferies



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

MGagen here, with another 3D project.

Many of you may recall that Matt Jefferies began the task of designing Space Station K7 before he hit on the idea of using components from a rejected NASA habitat model. Here is his original design:










There's no need to guess how big it is; it's one of the few examples of MJ placing real-world dimensions on a design. You probably recognize a few features that were borrowed for _Wrath of Khan_'s Regula One outpost. Even though this design didn't make it to the screen in _The Trouble with Tribbles_, there's no reason it shouldn't make an excellent TOS-era space station of its own.

So here are the beginnings of my 3D interpretation of this "lost" Jefferies original:



















Watch this space for further developments.

M.


----------



## mikephys (Mar 16, 2005)

What a cool project! Looks like it fits right into the TOS universe!


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

mikephys said:


> What a cool project! Looks like it fits right into the TOS universe!


Thanks! It _should_ fit in, given its pedigree.

M.


----------



## Trekkriffic (Mar 20, 2007)

What a find! A classsic design! Beautiful! Beautiful!


----------



## Griffworks (Jun 24, 2002)

It's fantastic to see this in a form other than on paper! Very kewel!


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

One of the features that is not shown in the drawing, but makes good sense to me, are windows on the insides of the rings. Outward-facing windows would only show deep space, but imagine the views you'd have of the rest of the station through inward facing windows! I'm taking the rounded inner surface as justification for larger, ceiling to floor windows in these areas. Upper decks in each ring would have windows that allow views "up the stack" and lower decks would open "down the stack."

Here are a couple of views that you would have out of the inner ring windows. First, a view from the lower half of the upper ring, looking down the stack toward the docking bay:










Next, a view from the upper half of the lower ring, looking up the stack:










As you can see, an office on the inner ring would feature spectacular views; especially once the model is finished.

M.


----------



## Carson Dyle (May 7, 2003)

Very cool! I'll certainly be keeping an eye on this one.


----------



## electric indigo (Dec 21, 2011)

Shouldn't the views be tilted 90 degrees since any spectator would be standing on the outward facing surfaces?


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

I like the idea of mega structures using simple physics instead of artificial gravity- in that universe you never hear about how much energy is used for grav-plating but even a small amount would save a lot of energy in a big station.
It is curious that his original sketches show the deck orientation clearly but also show windows set into what would be the floor in the overall view. Yeah, they could be sensors or something, but their distribution closely resembles the TOS-E's secondary hull patterns...


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

I think it is pretty obvious that it was intended to have artificial gravity like the Enterprise. 

The window patterns on the edges suggest this, and the rings are not circular: The segmented design would mean, unless the interior decks and structure were circular, that only the center of each segment would be "level" under spin gravity. Walking toward the corners would feel increasingly like going down hill. 

Also, I like the extra pods to represent the storage compartments. Transferring goods in bulk to them would be extremely difficult under spin.

M.


----------



## WarpCore Breach (Apr 27, 2005)

I've often wondered just what a station view from various locations would look like... and I do like this design; too bad it never got off the sketching stage!

Well done!!!


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

MGagen said:


> I think it is pretty obvious that it was intended to have artificial gravity like the Enterprise.
> 
> The window patterns on the edges suggest this, and the rings are not circular: The segmented design would mean, unless the interior decks and structure were circular, that only the center of each segment would be "level" under spin gravity. Walking toward the corners would feel increasingly like going down hill.
> 
> ...


I was looking at the sketches at the beginning of this thread- he shows the interior with concentric decking instead of the z-axis the windows imply. There are little people drawn showing the deck orientation.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Notice the arrow pointing to the spokes. He's depicting a cross section of a spoke. Note also the callout of 35 feet. It can't be a cross section of the rings, as elsewhere on the drawing he calls them out at 100 feet thick. Also, the overall dimension of 1800 feet would mean that the figures depicted (if it were a section of the rings) would be giants.

I admit that a spin orientation station would be an interesting idea to include in Trek, but I don't think they would have had the budget to build the interior sets it would have required. 

The other point is that energy must have almost no cost in Star Trek, since they've perfected the generation of anti-matter. In such a world the cost savings of centripetal gravity would be negligible.

M.


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

Fascinating!


----------



## SteveR (Aug 7, 2005)

MGagen said:


> In such a world the cost savings of *centripetal* gravity would be negligible.


Centripetal or _inertial_? 

Inertia would create the artificial gravity, while centripetal force would be represented by the resistance of the floor, no?


----------



## Paulbo (Sep 16, 2004)

Well, if you look at the original sketch, the cross section image showing the three decks has an arrow pointing at the spoke. If the station were spinning for artificial gravity everybody in the spoke would be flung outward. Between that and the windows on the outside of the "ring" it obviously means that the station has "Trek Normal" artificial gravity and doesn't rely on centripital force to create a gravity analog.


----------



## teslabe (Oct 20, 2007)

MGagen said:


> MGagen here, with another 3D project.
> 
> So here are the beginnings of my 3D interpretation of this "lost" Jefferies original:
> 
> ...


If you would like, I'd be happy to print it out for you, just send me a PM.

P.S. It wouldn't cost you anything.


----------



## SteveR (Aug 7, 2005)

Oh yeah, my vote goes for "Trek normal" gravity. I was just being picky about the use of "centripetal." I'll let it ... drop.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Teslabe,

You mean print as in 3D printer print?

I think I'll take you up on that, once it is finished.

Of course now I think I'll have to put some details that I was planning for texture maps into geometry...

M.


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

Wow, nice rendering of a Jefferies original. Cool idea.


----------



## teslabe (Oct 20, 2007)

MGagen said:


> Teslabe,
> 
> You mean print as in 3D printer print?
> 
> M.


Yes, I have a Makerbot Replicator 2. I think it would be cool to see this in a 
physical model. Can you save it as a .stl file ? It would need to be broken
down into individual parts that are "water tight" so we could maximize the build size. Send me a PM and we can talk more....:wave:


----------



## teslabe (Oct 20, 2007)

I was in such a hurry this morning I forgot to post the video of my printer in 
action.....


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Time for an overdue update.

Texturing is beginning. Here is the central spindle, complete with windows.

M.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Details for the storage pods. 

An artistic liberty: Jefferies didn't show any detail on the outer faces of the pods. Given these were likely meant to represent the storage compartments (when this was to be K-7) i have added large cargo doors...

M.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

A bit of progress.

The FJ-style cargo doors weren't too feasible for a station of this design so they had to go. In addition to the new doors, I have textured 
the habitat rings and added windows to the outer surfaces. 



















Still to do: The docking bay and radiator array, the inner habitat ring windows, 
and the overall hull markings. 

Eventually this station will have a Starbase designation. Since we already have a _DSS K-7_, 
and _SS Jefferies_ is contrary to known Federation naming conventions, I am taking suggestions. 
I'd like it to be a Starbase mentioned in TOS dialog, but never shown; ideally one that by implication 
is a major one (this is a big, honkin' beast). Ideas, anyone?

M.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Almost done.

Here is the rest of the exterior mapped and a good start on the interior of the docking pod. I've given it three landing areas. It is a big hangar. There is one large cargo door in the center and two smaller ones on either side. The four side alcoves are meant to be roll up doors that cover equipment bays. 

A bay this large would be difficult to pressurize. Perhaps the alcoves contain docking travel tubes. The original drawings do not indicate any type of door. Perhaps this was an early example of a semi-permiable force field. Any suggestions?

There is more detail to add to the hangar, as well as markings to the exterior.

M.


----------



## Fozzie (May 25, 2009)

Really enjoying this thread. Great work!


----------



## hubert (May 3, 2008)

Yep. Again, beautiful work! 

Can you replace the model for the episode of Trouble with Tribbles? LOL


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

I would never do that. I love the original!

M.


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

Another masterpiece!  GREAT work! Your surface texturing and details are very TOS-like. I like the shuttlebay interior--looks as if it could be from the original series.


----------



## Griffworks (Jun 24, 2002)

Ooh, lookin' _goooood_! :thumbsup:

I'd put something in there that suggestions there's a force field in play, tho maybe not as good as what we saw in TMP and beyond? One that is brought up and the bay is then pressurized, then depressurized and dropped for exit or entry? 

For canon Starbase designations, how 'bout Starbase 12? I can't find any reference to it ever having been seen on-screen, only mentioned. It could unofficially be called Jeffries Station.


----------



## J_Indy (Jan 28, 2013)

PerfesserCoffee said:


> Another masterpiece!  GREAT work! Your surface texturing and details are very TOS-like. I like the shuttlebay interior--looks as if it could be from the original series.


Agree - love the big red doors like the original series. 

One of the things I never understood about "Enterprise" - they send you off on a long-range mission in a ship that's drab enough to induce visual sensory deprivation...


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Thanks, Guys.

Actually, I gave a lot of thought to the forces field idea, but one on this scale was never seen in TOS. I wondered about some sort of travel tube that could adapt and link up to various ships, but that too was never seen in TOS.

I finally gave in and have fashioned doors for it like the ones on the cargo pods. They must have some incredible pump technology to evacuate and pressurize a space this large. They don't seem to have a problem with the hangar on the Enterprise, and although it isn't nearly this large, it is no small space.

M.


----------



## Rocky1775 (Dec 30, 2008)

MGagen said:


> Eventually this station will have a Starbase designation. Since we already have a _DSS K-7_,
> and _SS Jefferies_ is contrary to known Federation naming conventions, I am taking suggestions.
> I'd like it to be a Starbase mentioned in TOS dialog, but never shown; ideally one that by implication is a major one (this is a big, honkin' beast). Ideas, anyone?
> 
> M.


According to my Star Trek Concordance, by Bjo Trimble, the following starbases were mentioned in the series:

Starbase 11 was the site of Kirk's court martial, and where Captain Pike was hospitalized before Spock kidnapped him.

Starbase 2 (Turnabout Intruder)

Starbase 4 (And the Children shall Lead, Let that be Your Last Battlefield)

Starbase 6 (The Immunity Syndrome)

Starbase 9 (Tomorrow is Yesterday)

Starbase 10 (The Deadly Years)

Starbase 12 (Space Seed)

Starbase 27 (This Side of Paradise)


----------



## TonyT (Oct 19, 2013)

Wow! Very nice station!


----------



## Trekkriffic (Mar 20, 2007)

I love all the TOS touches. Like the "boxes" on the ceiling of the shuttle bay. Much like the ones on the Enterprise.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Here are the docking pod doors.

She is now Starbase 4.

M.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Well, it's just about complete. Textures have been adjusted, markings added, as well as lights. Here are some views:




























As you can see from the markings, I have tried to distinguish it from K-7, which is a civilian station. We never saw what kind of markings a Starfleet facility would carry, so I've used my imagination. The "WP" stands for "Warehouse Pod."

How big is it? Jefferies specifies 1800 feet from top to bottom on his sketch. Here are some scale comparison views next to the Enterprise and DSS K-7:



















This has been a really fun project. For years I have wanted to bring Matt Jefferies' more ambitious, original concept for K-7 to life. I think it makes a fine Starbase in its own right.

M.


----------



## Paulbo (Sep 16, 2004)

Nicely done!


----------



## Captain_April (Oct 20, 2002)

MGagen said:


> MGagen here, with another 3D project.
> 
> Many of you may recall that Matt Jefferies began the task of designing Space Station K7 before he hit on the idea of using components from a rejected NASA habitat model. Here is his original design:
> 
> ...


Interesting project, but what I find really interesting is the double pylons on the Enterprise design, that would have really helped with the nacelle droop problem of the classic Enterprise.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

That is because he initially drew the Enterprise at one size, then realized that the scale he had set for the station meant it was the wrong size. He then redrew it bigger. You can see this in the top view where the smaller primary hull is visible too.

M.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Here is a desktop sized render "At Starbase 4." 

M.


----------



## jheilman (Aug 30, 2001)

SWEET! :thumbsup:


----------



## TonyT (Oct 19, 2013)

Nicely done!


----------



## harristotle (Aug 7, 2008)

Outstanding job! :thumbsup:


----------



## Fernando Mureb (Nov 12, 2006)

WOW!!


----------



## Captain_April (Oct 20, 2002)

MGagen said:


> That is because he initially drew the Enterprise at one size, then realized that the scale he had set for the station meant it was the wrong size. He then redrew it bigger. You can see this in the top view where the smaller primary hull is visible too.
> 
> M.


My mistake but I think that it would make an interesting variant of the classic design.


----------



## Griffworks (Jun 24, 2002)

Turned out great, Mark!


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Thanks, guys.

Here's another one from a different angle.

M.


----------



## harristotle (Aug 7, 2008)

I love it!


----------



## Trekkriffic (Mar 20, 2007)

Yep. Pretty neat! I'd love to see a model of it.


----------

