# USS Grissom shooting model images?



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Hello Guys,

I was wondering if anyone can point me to decent shots of the shooting miniature of the USS Grissom from Star Trek 3? I have very vacu-form kit that I would like to build of this ship. Or maybe, a design more cogent with Roddenberry standards....


Oh, BTW, I also have a 41" Collective Excelsior. Does anyone know the math used to make a conic section out of a flat piece of plastic? The outer rim of the saucer is flat, not angled as it should be. I'm gonna need to correct that.

Thanks!


----------



## Poseidon (Aug 30, 2004)

I found two photos of the studio model from Christie's Auction. Go to this link and scroll down to the Oberth Class Starship. You'll see thumbnails there.
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/scans/sfvarious1.htm

Also, there is an article in Sci-fi & Fantasy Modeller, Volume 13. It is from 2009 and is made in the United Kingdom. I bought my issue from CultTVMan.com. The article shows the build of a resin kit of the Grissom, but it has great photos of this model.

Good Luck!


----------



## Poseidon (Aug 30, 2004)

Regarding the math to make a conic section from flat material (aka frustum), this should help. The formula for finding the length of the angled rim should be as follows:

The length of the angled rim shall be identified as - s
The vertical height of the rim shall be identified as - h
The top of the rim shall have a radius of - r
The bottom of the rim shall have a radius of - R

s = square root[ (h)squared + (R - r)squared ]


This link may be helpful:
http://mathforum.org/dr.math/faq/formulas/BuildFrustum.html


----------



## Magesblood (May 12, 2008)

my brain just imploded


----------



## cozmo (Nov 29, 2004)

Or, you could just try Shroudcalc


----------



## starseeker (Feb 1, 2006)

Uploaded some here:
http://s1004.photobucket.com/albums/af170/jkirkphotos/grissom/


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

There is a On Line Build of a Vacuform Grissom on the Starship Modeler Website
http://www.starshipmodeler.com/olb.cfm
I don't know if it thes ame kit you have, but this build includes full lighting.


----------



## Landru (May 25, 2009)

I really like that early version of the Grissom, any info on that?


----------



## Magesblood (May 12, 2008)

so, if anyone's interested in seeing a kit of this done by Round 2, please vote in this thread

y'know, not saying they will do one based solely on that poll but maybe a percentage here could translate into an estimate of global interest.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Poseidon said:


> Regarding the math to make a conic section from flat material (aka frustum), this should help. The formula for finding the length of the angled rim should be as follows:
> 
> The length of the angled rim shall be identified as - s
> The vertical height of the rim shall be identified as - h
> ...



Thanks it makes perfect sense as defined!


----------



## starseeker (Feb 1, 2006)

Added a couple more photos to the above link, deleted a couple duplicates. I hope they were duplicates.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

This info is so awesome. Thanks! Apparently the kit I have is the one illustrated in the article. 

What do you guys think of the Grissom design?


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Starseeker, Thank You! These Grissom shots help a lot. 

About your Excelsior blueprints, you show the saucer trench inner side as being curved vertically. All the images I have seem to indicate that this inner wall is flat vertically. I was wondering if you could clue me in to your reasoning for this vertical curvature, please?

Also, not sure if I can build this 41" kit to be 2027 feet. For 1/537, I'm calculating 1835. I'm not arguing with your conclusion, that is well reasoned, I believe. Just saying the LM/Collective kit is figuring out this way. Thoughts?


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

charonjr said:


> What do you guys think of the Grissom design?


I've always liked it. :thumbsup: A lot of folks have complained regarding some things about the design that don't make sense but it's always been a very cool design to me.


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

starseeker said:


> Uploaded some here:
> http://s1004.photobucket.com/albums/af170/jkirkphotos/grissom/


Those are great! Thanks!:thumbsup:


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

charonjr said:


> This info is so awesome. Thanks! Apparently the kit I have is the one illustrated in the article.
> 
> What do you guys think of the Grissom design?


The Grissom design works once you wrap your head around the fact the lower hull is a swappable equipment pod. For a deacicated research ship this makes a lot of sense and fits the Star Fleet modular approach to vessels.
I have seem some variants showing a Miranda Class Weapons pod in place of the Sensor Pod- a mean looking ship...

ST-TNG did get it wrong in one episode where they had a crossectional diagram on a monitor showing a side view and the pylons full of decks and a computer core.


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

Richard Baker said:


> The Grissom design works once you wrap your head around the fact the lower hull is a swappable equipment pod. For a dedicated research ship this makes a lot of sense and fits the Star Fleet modular approach to vessels.


I agree--that is the most plausible explanation.:thumbsup:


----------



## Magesblood (May 12, 2008)

Richard Baker said:


> The Grissom design works once you wrap your head around the fact the lower hull is a swappable equipment pod. For a deacicated research ship this makes a lot of sense and fits the Star Fleet modular approach to vessels.
> I have seem some variants showing a Miranda Class Weapons pod in place of the Sensor Pod- a mean looking ship...
> 
> ST-TNG did get it wrong in one episode where they had a crossectional diagram on a monitor showing a side view and the pylons full of decks and a computer core.


a ship wouldn't have a computer core? or decks? :freak:


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

Magesblood said:


> a ship wouldn't have a computer core? or decks? :freak:


The view had a computer core extending down through the _empty space_ between the hulls- they just took a side view of the ship and filled it from top to bottom with decks- ignoring the fact the lower hull was supported by the two curving pylons with nothing between them.


----------



## starseeker (Feb 1, 2006)

charonjr said:


> About your Excelsior blueprints, you show the saucer trench inner side as being curved vertically. All the images I have seem to indicate that this inner wall is flat vertically. I was wondering if you could clue me in to your reasoning for this vertical curvature, please?


I hope we're talking about the same thing: the trench that runs around the neck? It's been so long, I can't quite remember how I came up with that. In most pictures the inside edge, if that's the side closest to the center dome, could be vertical, or at least straight. Of course, the best photos are of Greg Jein's miniature, and it doesn't count. But in these, it seems that there is something else going on. It may be straight but it definitely isn't vertical. And straight just didn't seem in keeping with the Japanese design influence that someone (Eaves?) described as curve on top of curve on top of curve.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Starseeker, Yes we're talking the same part of the trench. I see that I meant the inner side wall of the trench is curved in one plane, and not two, as indicated in your drawing. You're correct that it is not entirely vertical, but angles from the base of the trench to the edge of the sensor. I'm seeing the angles as straight from base to edge and not curved in that dimension. Unfortunately, the shadows in the images make it really tough to distinguish either way.

Grissom could have had all the decks and computer core if they were hiding them behind a cloaking device.... 

One of the reasons that I was curious about what you all thought of the design is that it seems to violate Roddenberry's rule about keeping the warp engines away from habitable areas and easily jettisonable. We don't start seeing integrated warp engine designs until the Defiant in DS9. And Grissom's engines are truly a departure in design! Where is the engine room and warp core placed? In the pod below? In the saucer section?

I like the idea of mission specific pods, but would they all be without human access? Not even for maintenance? That question then begs access, life support, all the things that humans would require to be inside the pod itself.

I'm wondering that if I make a copy of the kit, would the parts be modular enough to be put into a different design? Some sketches I made say yes, but then you end up with another standard starship design. And, oddly, I kinda like Grissom as she is. Maybe I'm just trying to over think things, but I like my ships to make sense in the universe they inhabit.


----------



## Magesblood (May 12, 2008)

Richard Baker said:


> The view had a computer core extending down through the _empty space_ between the hulls- they just took a side view of the ship and filled it from top to bottom with decks- ignoring the fact the lower hull was supported by the two curving pylons with nothing between them.


oh yeah. I've seen those images. I'm not convinced they show everything the nay sayers say they do. I think they're just rooms or whatever in the pylons. Also, I don't think the pylons are as thin as people think. It's tough to judge scale in space.

Take the ever popular promo shot for ST:III. The BoP is supposed to be in front of the ship and looks nearly half the size. In reality it's toward the aft somewhere and a few clicks away if we're to accept the TNG/DS9 size. I'm sure I had a point in there but it got lost.


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

The Original Enterprise had rooms (though small) in the connecting Dorsal Pylon- the Grissom could have them too- my problem was about the Computer Core, which is specifically mentioned in the dialoge in that episode. Well hey- it is a TV show with a lot of rushed production flaws. If you ever want some fun- there are a couple of books called 'The Nitpicker's Guide to Star Trek-The Next Generation'- also one for DS9 & TOS. It is amazing what happens when you atre trying to get a show in the can and start filming the next one.
I think the warp core onthe Grissom was located in the flat spot between the engines, in front of the impulse defelction assembly. The engines were attached to the sides and could have been blown off- their design was totally different from the other ships seen so far with the big rear fins. They could be some sort of low energy minimal emission type engine- logical on a ship making delicate surveys. GR had another rule about having the Warp Engines in clear view of each other- Voyager violated that one. I guess the technology keeps improving and the original rules of starship design do not always have to be followed as the hardware gets refined...


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

True. I was, of course, trying to fit a square peg in a round hole, thinking that the Kirk era tech hadn't really progressed to the point of integrated nacelles. I like your thinking, Richard, about the nacelle design fitting the purpose of the mission.

Regarding Voyager: was she shown at warp with her engines down? It's been so long, I can't remember. I do remember the non-warp shots the most, usually a silhouette against a star. Made me think that they weren't trying too hard to get home....


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

Voyager would lift it's nacelles when it went to warp, but the secondary hull was still partially blocking the direct path between them.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Yes, that's true. Someone around here mentioned that the rule was amended to a 50% line of sight between the warp engines? Does that sound familiar to anyone?


----------



## Trek Ace (Jul 8, 2001)

Originally, the engines were to have a clear, unobstructed area between them. This was due to the space warp forming between the two pods, with the initial collapse occurring there and then enveloping the whole ship in a bubble. Any physical matter between the nacelles would be obliterated in the collapse of space-time.

The shape or strength of the subspace bubble would determine the direction and speed of the vessel, collapsing the space ahead of the ship like an accordion - therefore making the actual distance the ship needed to travel much shorter, like traveling inside a collapsible straw. That is why the ships needed a pair of nacelles to make them travel at warp speeds, with clear, empty space in between.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Seems GR had thought of the ship riding the bubble like a surfer ride a wave. I like your description. It even suggests why the TOS Enterprise was shaped the way it was, almost as if spacetime could be shaped to support the pods, engine hull and primary hull.

Interesting though, that with Grissom and Defiant and Voyager, the need to keep the hull out of the way was at least partially dropped. Even the E-D had partial obstruction.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Hey Guys,

I realized that due to the rarity of this kit, I'd rather have someone with a vacform machine make some back up pulls of it. I don't have the money to buy RTV, nor do I have a vacform machine. And I'd rather not start on the kit without a backup, in case I mess it up.

Can anybody help me with making a backup or three (in case I want to do a variant)? Or maybe, you all could point me in the right direction to build a vacformer? 

I don't know....Ideas?


----------



## Magesblood (May 12, 2008)

I happen to have a sheet of JTGraphics' Oberth Class decals for the USS Copernicius.

If you want it, it's yours.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

YESSSS! PLEASE! Magesblood, that's just awesome! You've just made my day!

Please mail them to me at:

David Christy
4751 S. Camino De La Pena
Tucson, AZ. 85746-4202

When I can, I'm going to get those detail pieces JT has, too. We're gonna make this kit rock!


----------



## Magesblood (May 12, 2008)

sure thing bub.

Get that out asap.

(Always wanted to live in the desert)


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

If weren't for those damn vaporators, maybe I could get off this rock! (Luke on a bad day)


----------



## Magesblood (May 12, 2008)

maybe and I'm just talkin' here but what if one day...yous wasn't around - your droid "decided to take a little trip" and you had to go after it, see? Maybe, just maybe Aunt Beru and Uncle Owen could be Aunt Burned to a crisp and Uncle Overdone, knowhatImean?


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

so....soo....this means your my dad, right? NOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Can't be! This is the worst day of my LIFE! You planned it all, I can see it in my head with this forced thingy..... All I wanted was to galavant around the galaxy and have fun with my friends (sniff)....


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Actually, next step is to pursue the 41" Excelsior, while Grissom awaits its replication (Still awaiting genius ideas on how to best do that....). 

One of the big problems (aside from some parts having very, VERY THIN pulls) is that the saucer is a big and somewhat floppy piece. I'm uncertain whether it's maintained a stable shape after all these years. The best support would be internal ribbing, but since the saucer shape is an estimate, I'm not sure how to make ribbing that would fit what I have.

Thoughts appreciated.


----------

