# PL Refit possible aftermarket parts ?



## ArthurPendragon (Jan 4, 2004)

Hi.

I remember Thomas Sasser talking about some details he designed for the PL 1/350 Refit, which were cut down at the final model kit offering.

These details were (IIRC) main saucer work bee storage "garages", "air lock four" interior (Spock walkway in ST-TMP), the aft saucer recreation deck interior and a possible "NCC-1701 A" Shuttlebay interior.

I believe it would be a very good idea to offer these parts as resin alternative details.

Will Thomas Models offer these ? Please, let us know.


----------



## woozle (Oct 17, 2002)

As much as we would like to see those, he's usually to busy with other projects, to put out that stuff.. though it's worth looking for. I don't think those parts of the model made it past the drawing board, before being axed.


----------



## justinleighty (Jan 13, 2003)

While he did the design work for those, he also did the design work for a shuttlepod bay for the NX-01 kit (which may still appear; IIRC, he was looking for someone to etch brass for the details). It would be nice to see some of those things, but you may be best off buying some sheet styrene and planning to do them yourself. Or we may be surprised and get the above offerings in a relatively short time. Who knows?


----------



## woozle (Oct 17, 2002)

DLM has also hinted at after market kits, though if Thomas has some in mind, that would be my first choice, not that DLM doesn't make nice stuff.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

I've been encourage Tom to do this every chance I get. 
I'll use this chance too - [Teal'c] Tom! Aftermarket! Kree![/Teal'c]

And SOMEbody needs to do a couple of versions of the bridge interiors for each film.


----------



## justinleighty (Jan 13, 2003)

woozle said:


> DLM has also hinted at after market kits, though if Thomas has some in mind, that would be my first choice, not that DLM doesn't make nice stuff.


Well, Arthur has the inside track on DLM plans, since he's mastered some of the DLM replacements for the AMT Refit, so he probably knows what's coming from that front.


----------



## Nighthawk (Oct 13, 2004)

First things first... someone swat the guy who handles the Polar Lights website at PlayingMantis.com. He put the 1:1000 NCC-1701 up as a new release instead of the 1701 refit. Grr.


----------



## ArthurPendragon (Jan 4, 2004)

justinleighty said:


> Well, Arthur has the inside track on DLM plans, since he's mastered some of the DLM replacements for the AMT Refit, so he probably knows what's coming from that front.


No... I don´t. Really.

Since Tomas already did the designs, it would be a logical choice to him.

Of course, someone else can do it too. No problem with that. 

Do you know something more we WILL need ?

SPARE CARGO CONTAINERS FOR THE CARGO DECK FLOOR !!

Like these:

http://probertdesigns.com/Folder_DESIGN/ART/TREK/CargoLIVE-1.jpg


----------



## Ignatz (Jun 20, 2000)

How come when they're on the floor they're vertical, but when they're stowed they're horizontal?


----------



## sbaxter (Jan 8, 2002)

Ignatz said:


> How come when they're on the floor they're vertical, but when they're stowed they're horizontal?


Because they aren't stamped "Handle With Care." 

Qapla'

SSB


----------



## woozle (Oct 17, 2002)

Very Good Point! That'll be detail item 899 in my cut-away version.


----------



## justinleighty (Jan 13, 2003)

Ignatz said:


> How come when they're on the floor they're vertical, but when they're stowed they're horizontal?


Because today's airport baggage handlers will have great-great-great-great-great grandkids.


----------



## GLU Sniffah (Apr 15, 2005)

I think most of the interiors mentioned in the original post could be easily scratch-built if one were so inclined! As to what is supposed to come with the Refit/A, here is a link to several photographs of Tom Sasser's prototypes:

Index of Refit photos link


----------



## GLU Sniffah (Apr 15, 2005)

Ignatz said:


> How come when they're on the floor they're vertical, but when they're stowed they're horizontal?


 Easier to stage on the cargo deck vertical to save space. Also, this is the orientation of the modules as the cargo bees bring them onto the deck.

Owing to space being at a premium, it makes sense to stage vertical until the handlers with grav sleds can stow them in their spaces properly.


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

Ignatz said:


> How come when they're on the floor they're vertical, but when they're stowed they're horizontal?


Because . . . [drumroll]

THERE'S NO UP OR DOWN IN SPACE!


----------



## beeblebrox (Jul 30, 2003)

That's not exactly true. Every Star Trek fan knows that all starships exist in the same two-dimensional horizontal plane with the same vertical orientation. No one ever goes up or down. :devil:


----------



## Otto69 (Jan 2, 2004)

*Not quite true.*

In Wrath of Khan they go up and down, but still in the same orientation relative to each other. Your point is well made; I'd give anything to see an episode where the Klingon ship is 'parked' at a 90 degree angle vertical to the Enterprise. Maybe have the Klingon commander looking down into the bridge dome and flipping Kirk off or something .

KHAAAAAAAN!


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

They did some unusual angles (for Trek) in STVI with the K'tinga in relation to 1701A but the Klingon still came about to the usual same-plane orientation after just a little bit. I agree that some real-space maneuvers might be visually stimulating.


----------



## JGG1701 (Nov 9, 2004)

www.khaaan.com


----------



## GLU Sniffah (Apr 15, 2005)

Spacecraft to spacecraft orientation is much less critical than orientation _within_ a spacecraft using grav plating or other form of AG. Sux when the walls become the ceiling!!! :O


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

GLU Sniffah said:


> Sux when the walls become the ceiling!!! :O


Almost as bad when the walls become the floor. Used to happen even in just semi-rough seas on the FFG I was on in the USN. :freak:


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

PerfesserCoffee said:


> Almost as bad when the walls become the floor. Used to happen even in just semi-rough seas on the FFG I was on in the USN. :freak:


 They're only about, what, ten feet long, though, aren't they? 


Franz Joseph had the perfect rational explaination for starship orientation. The galaxy, being a flattish disk, DOES have an up/down orientation. Starfleet established a subspace navigational beacon that has, by TOS' time, permeated most of the known galaxy. The broadcast tells the ship's navigation computer what the orientation of the galactic plane is, and then it's simple for navigators to keep ships "rightside up" to each other.

No reason the Klingons couldn't tap into the same transmission for convenience sake.


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

John P said:


> They're only about, what, ten feet long, though, aren't they?


Yeah, but it's more the lack of proportional width  that is a problem when it starts rolling (stabilizer fins--required since there was a helo deck--only made it shake in addition to the rough rolling). :freak:


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

John P said:


> Franz Joseph had the perfect rational explaination for starship orientation. The galaxy, being a flattish disk, DOES have an up/down orientation. Starfleet established a subspace navigational beacon that has, by TOS' time, permeated most of the known galaxy. The broadcast tells the ship's navigation computer what the orientation of the galactic plane is, and then it's simple for navigators to keep ships "rightside up" to each other.
> 
> No reason the Klingons couldn't tap into the same transmission for convenience sake.


Hmmm . . . maybe. The only problem is that the galaxy is many light years 'thick'. What do they do when traveling 'up and down' within the disc? Move like an elevator on the 'z-axis'? :freak:


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Not like an elevator, but like an airplane or a submarine. 

On earth we use longitude/latitude/altitude (or depth). In space they use galactic coordinates - distance from center point, angle off a zero-meridian, and distance above or below the galactic plane. As long as you have three coordinate points you can locate anything in 3 dimensional space. Not hard to understand at all.


----------



## beeblebrox (Jul 30, 2003)

So anyway, if the cargo boxes are sitting vertical... :freak:


----------



## Otto69 (Jan 2, 2004)

You know, there's a reason why the square shape exists. Stuff stacks well. So much for futuristicness .


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

John P said:


> Not like an elevator, but like an airplane or a submarine.
> 
> On earth we use longitude/latitude/altitude (or depth). In space they use galactic coordinates - distance from center point, angle off a zero-meridian, and distance above or below the galactic plane. As long as you have three coordinate points you can locate anything in 3 dimensional space. Not hard to understand at all.


No problem--I know what you're saying but what I'm trying to point out is that even with the FJ coordinate system ships still aren't always going to meet face to face in the same plane which is what brought this discussion up to begin with.


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

Otto69 said:


> You know, there's a reason why the square shape exists. Stuff stacks well. So much for futuristicness .


Yep! And cylinders and spheres and such have their strengths and weaknesses. Things can't change TOO much when it comes to physics.


----------



## spe130 (Apr 13, 2004)

TNG had those octagonal shipping containers...can't remember if they were ever used in DS9 or Voyager, though.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

PerfesserCoffee said:


> No problem--I know what you're saying but what I'm trying to point out is that even with the FJ coordinate system ships still aren't always going to meet face to face in the same plane which is what brought this discussion up to begin with.


 Very possibley. But they'll all know exactly which way is galactic "up" without question.


----------



## Ignatz (Jun 20, 2000)

Well, if they're transported vertically, staged and used vertically (there's a shot where the container is open) then shouldn't they be stored vertically--for simplicity's sake, if nothing else? They ought to be rectangular...


----------



## mb1k (May 6, 2002)

JGG1701 said:


> www.khaaan.com


Priceless :thumbsup:


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

John P said:


> Very possibley. But they'll all know exactly which way is galactic "up" without question.


Agreed. :thumbsup:


----------



## justinleighty (Jan 13, 2003)

Otto69 said:


> In Wrath of Khan they go up and down, but still in the same orientation relative to each other. Your point is well made; I'd give anything to see an episode where the Klingon ship is 'parked' at a 90 degree angle vertical to the Enterprise.


Don't forget the ending of TNG ("All Good Things") where the future E-D comes at the Klingons at about a 90º angle, blowing through one then flying up relative to the camera to pass through the explosion/debris field.


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

^^Yes! Except for smaller fighter style craft on occasion, that was a rare exception to the rule. I think they did it that way to emphasize the difference in the 'universes' that were being looked at.


----------



## spe130 (Apr 13, 2004)

I seem to remember ships in DS9 getting into some funky positions in the big battles. The Defiant was always in strange positions (see Starship Down and The Valiant). They broke the rules on a lot of things Trek, though.


----------



## Captain America (Sep 9, 2002)

spe130 said:


> I seem to remember ships in DS9 getting into some funky positions in the big battles. The Defiant was always in strange positions (see Starship Down and The Valiant). They broke the rules on a lot of things Trek, though.


I read somewhere that they were starting to use the 3D Starships around then, so they didn't have the limitations of the physical filming models (armature mounting points.), so they were able to let the ships get properly '3D' in battle. :wave:


----------

