# TOS Enterprise Bridge Question...



## brad4321 (Jan 26, 2014)

I just got the AMT Command Bridge model. I thought it would be cool to display with my almost finished 1/350 Enterprise. I'm far from a Trek expert and I don't often build Science Fiction stuff. I don't know all the terminology so bear with me. When you build the walkway forming the circle, the peninsula with the captain's chair does not line up directly facing the view screen. Not even close. I've looked thru all the reviews and builds and I can find and no one mentions this. I've seen a few builds that look like mine, and a few that do line up. Any ideas? Thanks!


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Hm. Well, it certainly should!


----------



## brad4321 (Jan 26, 2014)

But it doesn't. Not close. It's so off I can't believe no one mentions it in a review or build, that I've seen.


----------



## Fozzie (May 25, 2009)

brad4321 said:


> I just got the AMT Command Bridge model. I thought it would be cool to display with my almost finished 1/350 Enterprise. I'm far from a Trek expert and I don't often build Science Fiction stuff. I don't know all the terminology so bear with me. When you build the walkway forming the circle, the peninsula with the captain's chair does not line up directly facing the view screen. Not even close. I've looked thru all the reviews and builds and I can find and no one mentions this. I've seen a few builds that look like mine, and a few that do line up. Any ideas? Thanks!


I bet with a picture we could figure this out quickly.


----------



## brad4321 (Jan 26, 2014)

I can't take a pic just yet. I found a link here with the same issue. I can't post a link says the website until I have posted 5 times. I guess this makes 3 for me.....


----------



## brad4321 (Jan 26, 2014)

http://www.hobbytalk.com/bbs1/showthread.php?t=276699&page=5

Look at the first photo on this page, looking directly down on it. This is exactly how mine builds up.


----------



## Proper2 (Dec 8, 2010)

Look at the schematic: http://www.cygnus-x1.net/links/lcars/blueprints/uss-enterprise-bridge-sheet-1.jpg

If the command module and its walkway don't directly face the view-screen, something is in error, unfortunately.


----------



## brad4321 (Jan 26, 2014)

Proper2 said:


> Look at the schematic: http://www.cygnus-x1.net/links/lcars/blueprints/uss-enterprise-bridge-sheet-1.jpg
> 
> If the command module and its walkway don't directly face the view-screen, something is in error, unfortunately.



That is a beautiful and informative blueprint. Thank you!:thumbsup:


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

IIRC there was a slot in the 'walkway' piece for the Captain's Chair et al floor. I kind of suspect if this is true, the 'walkway' parts may have been assembled incorrectly.

Just saying.


----------



## brad4321 (Jan 26, 2014)

Steve H said:


> IIRC there was a slot in the 'walkway' piece for the Captain's Chair et al floor. I kind of suspect if this is true, the 'walkway' parts may have been assembled incorrectly.
> 
> Just saying.



Thanks for the response. I'm not sure I totally follow what you're saying. There is a slot yes. I have checked, double checked, triple and quadruple checked the walkway pieces - their position, fit, alignment, etc, etc and I get this result every time.


----------



## Dark Guyver (May 30, 2009)

I know what you're saying. I had the original kit back in the 70's, and it had the same problem. Never figured it out. Perhaps the front and back edges of the "peninsula" are not quite parallel to one another.


----------



## WarpCore Breach (Apr 27, 2005)

I've never had the issue of the command pedestal not facing the viewscreen. I've built several Bridges with no problems.

Lacking pictures, the only reason(s) I can think of is the upper deck segment the pedestal fits into has been placed into the wrong spot OR the viewscreen piece is in the incorrect location.

When you can post pics, it would help a lot! Thanks!


----------



## brad4321 (Jan 26, 2014)

I can't see how it's possible for it to be correct. If you imagine the view screen at six o'clock and the piece the peninsula comes off of at 12:00 - there are 4 full size pieces on the left side of the circle and 3 full size pieces plus a smaller piece on the right. The right side has the smaller section the elevator doors fit onto. It HAS to be aimed incorrectly. There is simply more degrees of the circle on the left side. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6bMliweyoI

You can see in just the first few seconds of this review that it isn't lined up.


----------



## RSN (Jul 29, 2008)

In one of the most used pieces of stock footage from the series, the captain's island is clearly not pointed directly at the viewscreen.


----------



## brad4321 (Jan 26, 2014)

Ok, so here it is.....


----------



## Proper2 (Dec 8, 2010)

RSN said:


> In one of the most used pieces of stock footage from the series, the captain's island is clearly not pointed directly at the viewscreen.


I don't believe this angle is conclusive at all. And if anything, to me it appears that it does point directly at the screen. Again, look at the schematic in post #7. The command module should be directly facing the screen. It makes no design sense for it to be intentionally just a couple of degrees off.


----------



## Fernando Mureb (Nov 12, 2006)

RSN said:


> In one of the most used pieces of stock footage from the series, the captain's island is clearly not pointed directly at the viewscreen.


Clearly, uh?! I urgently need to visit my ophthalmologist.:freak:


----------



## brad4321 (Jan 26, 2014)

I agree it does appear to not be aiming directly at it, but not necessarily "clearly". But the model has it aiming too far right, not left. So either way, I'm head scratching.


----------



## Fernando Mureb (Nov 12, 2006)

Proper2 said:


> I don't believe this angle is conclusive at all. And if anything, to me it appears that it does point directly at the screen. Again, look at the schematic in post #7. The command module should be directly facing the screen. It makes no design sense for it to be intentionally just a couple of degrees off.


Exact. And if they built the set wrongly, they should have been fired.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

OK, looking at that picture, I'll use this as location: The viewing screen floor piece is at 9 o'clock, the command section is at 3 o'clock. 

I am willing to bet that even tho they SEEM identical, the floor pieces at 8, 10 and 2 o'clock are NOT identical. 

(I think of it as the 'HO slot track conundrum  )

One of those three pieces is just a touch bigger (or, maybe, smaller). I recall trying the 'two kit bash' build back in the day and the frustration of the parts not working quite right without some fooling around. Because the kit was originally designed to be just a section, see?

So I'm guessing the new tooled parts to complete the circle needed to take that fudge factor into account, so when you glance at them in a pile they look identical but if you were to stack them one on top of the other they'd show variations. 

Of course if they're already glued together that's kind of too late. I suppose they can be pried apart, maybe run liquid cement along the seam and pull. 

Or, further reflection, the two-part sections at 12 and 6 o'clock might be 'handed', a specific 'left' and 'right' with a touch of built in bias. 

anyway, that's my guess.


----------



## BWolfe (Sep 24, 2013)

brad4321 said:


> Ok, so here it is.....


That is a flaw in this model that has existed since it was first released in the 1970's. I corrected it on the bridge model I built in '94 by shaving the back edge of the center platform where it mates to the main section of the bridge. seems like I had to trim about 2mm from it to get it to fit right.


----------



## brad4321 (Jan 26, 2014)

Steve H said:


> OK, looking at that picture, I'll use this as location: The viewing screen floor piece is at 9 o'clock, the command section is at 3 o'clock.
> 
> I am willing to bet that even tho they SEEM identical, the floor pieces at 8, 10 and 2 o'clock are NOT identical.
> 
> ...


No, it is not glued yet. Just sitting as is. It's a puzzle and it's driving me nuts. I've taken it apart and put it together a gazillion times. Same exact result a thousand straight times.


----------



## RSN (Jul 29, 2008)

And here you can clearly see that it is positioned directly in front of the elevator, (The way Matt Jeffries designed it to be!) and pointed nowhere near the viewscreen. It was a set, it was positioned however the director wanted to frame the shot. :thumbsup:


----------



## Fozzie (May 25, 2009)

I pulled out my kit and test fit the parts, but, first, this diagram from the instructions:










Look closely. It APPEARS to show a slight mis-alignment in the same direction that brad4321 is describing. 

I assembled my deck pieces making sure to place them as shown in the diagram and, yes, the Captain's chair does not directly face the viewscreen.

I compared the footprints of the various pieces. Pieces 9 and 20 (mirrors) appear identical. There is a SLIGHT difference btw 11 and 22 (mirrors) but not enough, in my opinion, to cause the misalignment. 13 and 12 seem to be the same size. There is no mirror for 17, but it and 7 have the same footprint. 23 (elevator) and 15 (viewscreen) are differently shaped and do NOT have identical footprints. They appear to vary by 1mm in the front and 1.5mm in the back. Combine this with the minor difference I saw in parts 11 and 22 and you MAY have the explanation for the misalignment.


----------



## RSN (Jul 29, 2008)

brad4321 said:


> Ok, so here it is.....


It does not look as bad as I was imagining. If refitting some of the floor pieces does not correct it, as simple fix would be to cut a plastic shim on the "Spock" side where the island connects to the upper floor. Then sand the "Scotty" side down to an even and tapered angle. that should straighten it and not really effect the overall look of the model, not like leaving it off-set would anyway.


----------



## Fozzie (May 25, 2009)

RSN said:


> It does not look as bad as I was imagining. If refitting some of the floor pieces does not correct it, as simple fix would be to cut a plastic shim on the "Spock" side where the island connects to the upper floor. Then sand the "Scotty" side down to an even and tapered angle. that should straighten it and not really effect the overall look of the model, not like leaving it off-set would anyway.


I would take the same approach.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

This old thread might be helpful. The AMT bridge was never set up quite right:

http://www.hobbytalk.com/bbs1/showthread.php?t=183451

BTW, I tried to find the original post, referred to in that thread, where I first detailed my 35.5/40.5 degree findings on the original set, but I couldn't turn it up. For what it's worth, here's my summary graphic.


----------



## Proper2 (Dec 8, 2010)

MGagen said:


>


Right. There is no doubt in my mind that the command module center-line and that of the main view screen should align. And every schematic I've seen shows this. Whether the actual filming set was built exactly to correct spec--or even cheated for filming purposes--I guess we'll never really know. But for me, that's irrelevant: I think any decent model should align as such or it would simply look wrong.


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

You know, I'm starting to think that is the case, that maybe, MAYBE, the set was built to 'cheat' the alignment, so that it would be easier to film (remember, big cameras, huge lights) and you could still see the actors faces when they're supposed to be staring straight ahead.

If that is the case then it may well be likely the model was built to copy that.

Or not. It could probably go either way. Hurm.


----------



## Proper2 (Dec 8, 2010)

I see no mis-alignment in the AMT instructions diagram. I just think the parts were not cast and or engineered very precisely, is all. That's unfortunate.


----------



## brad4321 (Jan 26, 2014)

Thank you everyone. I wasn't sure I would get a single response. I'm glad to see I wasn't losing my mind. The four pieces between 6 o'clock and 12:00 have too wide an angle and just go too far around the circle. 

But sometimes a build is as much a celebration of a kit as it is of a subject. I will fix this best I can, repair some of the inaccuracies along the way, deal with the rest I can't fix, and enjoy the process.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Proper2 said:


> I see no mis-alignment in the AMT instructions diagram. I just think the parts were not cast and or engineered very precisely, is all. That's unfortunate.



That is AMT in the '70s. Do it fast and cheep, and cash in.
The Romulan, Bridge, Shuttlecraft, and Exploration set were all
terrible kits. We bought them anyway.


----------



## WarpCore Breach (Apr 27, 2005)

Wow, step away for some hours and the commentary exploded!

Glad it sorta/kinda worked out. Yes, the Bridge pieces can't be swapped around, they are "keyed" into being next to certain other pieces but they shouldn't be that way. For that reason, you have to note which railing goes where.. those are "keyed" as well.

I'll have to dig out my Bridges and see how the Command pedestal did align.. I simply do not have any memory of it not lining up properly.

Plus, I'll check my reissued Bridge kit and see how it works. I found that placing the deck pieces next to each other simply did not work owing them sliding out of position and not lining up unless solidly taped (at least) for an alignment check.


----------



## Zombie_61 (Apr 21, 2004)

mach7 said:


> ...The Romulan, Bridge, Shuttlecraft, and Exploration set were all terrible kits. We bought them anyway.


:lol: :thumbsup::thumbsup:


----------



## Dave in RI (Jun 28, 2009)

RSN said:


> And here you can clearly see that it is positioned directly in front of the elevator, (The way Matt Jeffries designed it to be!) and pointed nowhere near the viewscreen. It was a set, it was positioned however the director wanted to frame the shot. :thumbsup:


This is so true! There are some scenes where the command center is no way aligned with the main view screen.


----------



## RSN (Jul 29, 2008)

Dave in RI said:


> This is so true! There are some scenes where the command center is no way aligned with the main view screen.
> 
> View attachment 184861
> 
> ...


Well, I am glad I am not the only one to clearly see it!! :thumbsup:


----------



## Proper2 (Dec 8, 2010)

RSN said:


> And here you can clearly see that it is positioned directly in front of the elevator, (The way Matt Jeffries designed it to be!) and pointed nowhere near the viewscreen.


Actually, this is not at all true! Jefferies' sketches and blueprints show exactly how he designed the bridge--with the command module directly facing the main view screen and *not* aligning with the elevator: http://ottens.co.uk/forgottentrek/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/Jefferies-bridge-floorplan.jpg. And this is how it appears in most if not all of the episodes. Some snapshots of the set may show a temporary atypical arrangement for a special scene, but the bottom line is, unless one is building a model of what the director may have moved around for filming a particular scene a certain way, one would be building the model incorrectly. And the AMT kit is clearly not a "specialized" kit catering to the director--it's simply a poorly executed kit. :freak:


----------



## RSN (Jul 29, 2008)

Proper2 said:


> Actually, this is not at all true! Jefferies' sketches and blueprints show exactly how he designed the bridge--with the command module directly facing the main view screen and *not* aligning with the elevator: http://ottens.co.uk/forgottentrek/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/Jefferies-bridge-floorplan.jpg. And this is how it appears in most if not all of the episodes. Some snapshots of the set may show a temporary atypical arrangement for a special scene, but the bottom line is, unless one is building a model of what the director may have moved around for filming a particular scene a certain way, one would be building the model incorrectly. And the AMT kit is clearly not a "specialized" kit catering to the director--it's simply a poorly executed kit. :freak:


In more than one interview that saw print, Jefferies said very emphatically that the elevator door was the rear of the set with the command island directly in front of it. It was determined that it would be more dramatic to have it off-set so the camera could see past the captain as people exited the elevator. Yes, the production drawings that you posted show the final assembly of the set and were drawn during or in some cases after production, but it was not Jefferies original intent. 

And no, I don't remember where and when over the last 45 years, but I believe there is a mention of this fact on the Memory Alpha website. 

Also, that first, roughly drawn, sketch is actually from the 1970's when the sets were being drawn for the "Phase 2" project. You can tell this by the lift door on the wrong side and a duplicate alcove with a C/L on the other side of the rear control station. Also the words "Symmetrical on C/L" mean the side not drawn is symmetrical on the other side of the Center Line. I am a draftsman and set designer, I notice things like that.


----------



## Proper2 (Dec 8, 2010)

RSN said:


> In more than one interview that saw print, Jefferies said very emphatically that the elevator door was the rear of the set with the command island directly in front of it. It was determined that it would be more dramatic to have it off-set so the camera could see past the captain as people exited the elevator. Yes, the production drawings that you posted show the final assembly of the set and were drawn during or in some cases after production, but it was not Jefferies original intent.
> 
> And no, I don't remember where and when over the last 45 years, but I believe there is a mention of this fact on the Memory Alpha website. :thumbsup:


Well, Jefferies may originally intended as you describe but what ultimately he sketched and designed on paper, and then what was actually built is clearly not that. To the point here, we are talking about a kit modeled after the bridge of the Enterprise and not the designer's first idea in his head.


----------



## RSN (Jul 29, 2008)

Proper2 said:


> Well, Jefferies may originally intended as you describe but what ultimately he sketched and designed on paper, and then what was actually built is clearly not that. To the point here, we are talking about a kit modeled after the bridge of the Enterprise and not the designer's first idea in his head.


I understand that and I have already posted a very easy fix for the slight misalignment, just having a bit of trivial fun!! :thumbsup:


----------



## djnick66 (May 2, 2008)

I just built an original AMT kit recently. The problem sounds like just not prepping the parts properly. The fit of the whole kit is pretty bad. I sanded the floor/ring sections with a block to make sure the sides were as true as possible. Any little gaps and irregularities between the segments will escalate as you glue things together.

Also, the AMT Trek kits are not great kits. Stuff may just be off. Asymetrical, etc. But the chair and screen should align properly.


----------



## Lee Staton (May 13, 2000)

I don't know whether you guys will be interested, but here goes. 

In the 1960's I learned as a kid that I could write to model companies and get replies, staring with Aurora. In the 1970's, while I was in high school, I started writing to AMT because I was excited that they were bringing out the Spock kit. I befriended Rick Waldorf, who was in product development. 

It is hard to imagine what it was like in those days, pre-internet and post-cancellation, but AMT could not obtain reference material from Paramount. They had the drawings that were in "The Making of Star Trek" and film clip frames provided by zealous fans like me, but nobody was at the studio who cared. You've got to remember that in this time period Paramount loaned out the big E model to a high school science teacher and acted like they didn't care if he gave it back! 

Rick Waldorf got film clips from me for reference for the bridge, the Romulan BOP, and the Exploration Set. In return, he'd send me test shots of the kits in production. I would rather naively send back long critiques of the test shots, but nothing I suggested _ever_ changed. In this era, sci-fi kits were treated as toys for an audience who didn't know better. After all, if they didn't have reference, how could we fans get it?

I would get so excited to see the illustrations in their catalogs back then. The art would be accurate...but then the kit would be horribly compromised. Their Romulan BOP illo was fantastic, and we all know how the kit turned out. Just bad pattern-making and compromises to make the kit cheaper. Their bridge catalog art was very close to correct, but then the kit was just terrible. 

In an episode I'm not particularly proud of, I got to tour the AMT plant in Troy, Michigan. A nice fellow named Bill Brown took me on the tour, and I was just 18 or so (1975 or '76). In the product development offices, they had the big painting of the bridge that they'd used in the catalog. When Mr. Brown showed it to me and said off-handedly that they'd made some compromises in the kit that nobody would notice, well, smart-a$$ed me stood there and pointed them all out to him! In hindsight, I probably just came across as Sheldon Cooper.

In reissuing this kit, even with improvements, Jamie and the good folks at Round 2 are still stuck with the basic tooling, which is really pretty messed up. I give them lots of credit (honestly) for making this sow's ear into maybe a denim purse. It may not be silk, but this kit's lineage from the mid-1970's can't be helped. It is still a product of those times.

Hope I haven't bored you all. I still have a file folder with most of my AMT correspondence and catalogs from that time.

My final thought is this: The great Round 2 kits we are getting would not be what they are even today if the only reference available was what could be gotten from Paramount. It is guys like Gary Kerr, who have spent a lifetime documenting a number of s-f subjects, that have been the not-so-secret weapon in the war against inaccurate kits. 

Every time I see the new products today I feel like a kid at Christmas!

Hope we'll see some cool bridge builds at WonderFest!

Lee

P.S. - AMT still remembered that they had made the shuttlecraft, but Mr. Brown told me it was Stephen Whitfield, the author, who had done it. Whitfield (Poe) actually HAD gotten involved with Star Trek through AMT, but it was Gene Winfield, car customizer, who made the shuttlecraft in Phoenix. In 10 years that relationship had been lost. SO the shuttlecraft was tooled only from what they could see in "The Making of Star Trek" book. Thank goodness times have changed!


----------



## Lee Staton (May 13, 2000)

One last tidbit I have posted in another thread years ago: Back when Matt Jefferies was working on Little House on the Prairie I got it confirmed that the carpeting on the bridge was two colors. Charcoal gray on the upper level and beige-gray on the lower level.

Haven't seen the paint guide for the kit, but once you know this you can clearly see it in stills.

Lee


----------



## RSN (Jul 29, 2008)

Awesome stories, I love stuff like that. Not boring at all!!


----------



## Steve H (Feb 8, 2009)

RSN said:


> Awesome stories, I love stuff like that. Not boring at all!!


Indeed, the kind of thing that should be preserved, with context, for all time.


----------



## ClubTepes (Jul 31, 2002)

RSN said:


> And here you can clearly see that it is positioned directly in front of the elevator, (The way Matt Jeffries designed it to be!) and pointed nowhere near the viewscreen. It was a set, it was positioned however the director wanted to frame the shot. :thumbsup:


Agreed.

Things are 'cheated' CONSTANTLY, to get the shot.

IF the center platform were loose or on rollers (I'm NOT saying it was) then it could have be constantly 'tweeked' as desired.


----------



## ClubTepes (Jul 31, 2002)

Dave in RI said:


> This is so true! There are some scenes where the command center is no way aligned with the main view screen.
> 
> View attachment 184861
> 
> ...


Good catches, I never noticed them before and I 'cheat' things constantly on set and am well aware of the practice.

Thats the whole point, is to get the shot, sometimes the quickest way possible.

If the center section WERE loose or on rollers, they might have decided that it was quicker to twist the center section for existing light, rather than to relight the set for the angle.


----------



## BWolfe (Sep 24, 2013)

In "Where No Man Has Gone Before" it is very obvious that the center line of the command module is aligned differently than what it was in most other episodes.


----------



## mach7 (Mar 25, 2002)

Between WNMHGB and production the set was completely rebuilt after moving from Culver City facility to Gower St facility. So this helps explain
the different positions. I believe The center pod was movable.


----------



## StarCruiser (Sep 28, 1999)

RSN said:


> In more than one interview that saw print, Jefferies said very emphatically that the elevator door was the rear of the set with the command island directly in front of it. It was determined that it would be more dramatic to have it off-set so the camera could see past the captain as people exited the elevator. Yes, the production drawings that you posted show the final assembly of the set and were drawn during or in some cases after production, but it was not Jefferies original intent.
> 
> And no, I don't remember where and when over the last 45 years, but I believe there is a mention of this fact on the Memory Alpha website.
> 
> Also, that first, roughly drawn, sketch is actually from the 1970's when the sets were being drawn for the "Phase 2" project. You can tell this by the lift door on the wrong side and a duplicate alcove with a C/L on the other side of the rear control station. Also the words "Symmetrical on C/L" mean the side not drawn is symmetrical on the other side of the Center Line. I am a draftsman and set designer, I notice things like that.


And of course - there is the date note in the corner "6/77". Right in line with Phase II's development...


----------



## RSN (Jul 29, 2008)

StarCruiser said:


> And of course - there is the date note in the corner "6/77". Right in line with Phase II's development...


:thumbsup:


----------



## Proper2 (Dec 8, 2010)

RSN said:


> Also, that first, roughly drawn, sketch is actually from the 1970's when the sets were being drawn for the "Phase 2" project.


If anything the date on that sketch serves as an affirmation of the design of the actual set. The date does not preclude that the command module was designed and made to be offset from the elevator and to directly face the view screen--which is the real point, and what was brought into question by the thread starter. The answer is that the command module should indeed face the view screen squarely and not the elevator. I believe this is no longer in question, is it?


----------



## RSN (Jul 29, 2008)

Proper2 said:


> If anything the date on that sketch serves as an affirmation of the design of the actual set. The date does not preclude that the command module was designed and made to be offset from the elevator and to directly face the view screen--which is the real point, and what was brought into question by the thread starter. The answer is that the command module should indeed face the view screen squarely and not the elevator. I believe this is no longer in question, is it?


To beat the proverbial dead horse, the first sketch you posted was not of the Original Series bridge, drawn in 1964, it is for "Star Trek: Phase 2" and was drawn in 1977, so no, it has nothing to do with my original comment. Also, I never said the command island was directly in front of the elevator for the production of the show, I said it was ORIGINALLY intended to be that way in Jefferies' concept of the set and that for one camera set up, in one episode, it was aligned with the elevator alcove as he first wanted. I provided a picture to show my observation just for fun, not as "proof" of anything. Hope that make things a bit clearer.

And as I posted a few back, I and a few others have offered some actual solutions to fix this minor problem with the kit, which brad4321 said he would be considering in his build.


----------



## MGagen (Dec 18, 2001)

Lee, 

Thank you for that _wonderful_ memoir of those halcyon days. It really takes me back. Fans who didn't live through that time can't really imagine the thrill we all got when kits like the Romulan ship and the Bridge model came out.

I noticed the inaccuracies even then, but they were still _NEW TREK!_ The only disappointment I never got over was the Exploration Kit...

Until Art Asylum, that is.

M.


----------



## drmcoy (Nov 18, 2004)

what Mgagen said.


----------



## Lee Staton (May 13, 2000)

Thanks! I have fond memories of those experiences. I just wish the models had been better!

I have seen some really great bridge build-ups at past WonderFests. Even an imperfect kit can be upgraded by a modeler with patience.

I'm really glad Round 2 has been tweaking these kits and keeping them available.

Lee


----------



## Landru (May 25, 2009)

Cool stories, Lee! 

In 'Spock's Brain' there's also a rare view of Kirk roaming the bridge straight in front of the viewscreen, the helm is also off centre there too from memory..

To me it seems as if the interior bridge set was originally designed to mimic the exterior model ie, lift-aft. Later some director or production head pointed out that the bridge set might have to be arranged differently to allow for better camera blocking. This also may have been very last minute, remember the bridge set was designed to roll out like pie wedges. Maybe on the first days shooting on 'The Cage' the director simply swapped the two set pieces around to get a better look? That's always been my theory


----------



## shabo451 (Jan 27, 2008)

I always had the same issue. If you compare the railing that goes in front of the turbolift, it's smaller than the other three. The turbolift floor section needs to be widened a bit to get a correct lineup. I'm scratchbuilding that section to modify the turboshaft doors to the correct dimensions.


----------

