# Need advice on planning 1/350 Excelsior Kit



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Hi Guys!

My Mother passed recently, leaving me as a co-trustee of her property and home. I've moved here and I have the room now to construct a vacu-form machine large enough for the saucer of the Excelsior/1701B and other components. 

My intent is to make a garage kit for those interested in a 54" model. 

There are a couple of possible approaches that I can think of. One is to make vacuform hulls with internal frame supports of styrene sheet. Another idea is to fabricate a plank on frame method where all the internal frames are cut and the individual panels are mounted to the frames.

Obviously, making this as inexpensive, but reasonably accurate is the goal.

I need advice from anyone else (Moebius, etc.) who have gone into making kits as to what the best materials would be to make the pattern, the mold, etc. I'm thinking .020" plastic sheet could be good, with a max size of 3 feet on the vacuformer itself.

All of this will obviously take a while to get set up, tested and made.

What sort of interest would there be in a kit this size? Would it be better to do a smaller kit sized to the AMT refit (about 33").

Understand this: I am going with the officially stated length of the Excelsior of 1531 feet. I won't brook an argument on this.

David


----------



## lizzybus (Jun 18, 2005)

Excelsior is my favourite ship....

1:350 is definitely the way to go!!!!!

I for one am in.....as long as i don't need a bank loan to buy it!!

Rich


----------



## Modeler1964 (Aug 13, 2006)

I guess it would depend on which version? The NX and NCC versions were slightly different. I like the NCC version a little better. A vac kit would be less expensive of course on the buyers side of things but the develpoment costs for you would still be high as with any kit. You may want to contact Vaderman, he is producing a vac kit of the 1/350th TOS bird of prey using female molds to better capture detail. 
Some people shy away from vac kits as they present unique challenges as you stated as far as armatures, fit, assembly etc. (I fall into this group myself). I had though about producing a model in this scale myself but don't have the shop space I would need to do it. I was going to go with epoxy fiberglass layed up in silicone molds, similar to what REL does. 
Of course, count me in and post pics on your progress. Thanks for taking on this most ambitious project!
Bryan


----------



## WarpCore Breach (Apr 27, 2005)

I don't have any experience with pattern/mold making myself...

But for the model itself, I think you will find that .020 plastic will be far too thin for the hull, even with an internal armature.

I suggest the internal armature with vacform hull.

As has been pointed out, there are differences between the NX, NCC and 1701-B refit versions... Once all the changes have been mapped out, perhaps have parts made to fit those areas specific to whichever version the builder would prefer! My own preference is for the NCC version. :thumbsup:

Good luck!!


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

An internal frame would be the way to go- the rear of the secondary hull and engine will need some serious support.
One weird idea- have the model frame provide an option for a mount point out the side of the secondary hull so it can be attached to a plate on a wall instead somebody having to ge a five foot table. Sort of like how they mount flat screen TVs.

This souinds like an impressive kit you are planning- I am going to look forward to this as it develops...


----------



## Vaderman (Nov 2, 2002)

David,

I would be happy to correspond with you on what I have used for materials, molds, styrene, negative molds, etc.

I agree that .020 is too thin. That is like a dixie cup. The lowest I would go is .040. If there is not a lot of sharp angles or scribing, you may be able to use .060. 

With something this large, you will definitely need an internal armature. I don't think you need a blank on frame one. I would not worry about this part until you get the hulls done first.

Have you looked at REL's progression on the E-D? That is the best approach to making the saucer and hulls. If you contact him, he would probably share those pictures of creating the masters again. 

The other option is having parts grown or 3D printed, but that could get expensive, but if you start with detailed files, you will get accurate and symetrical products.

Feel free to PM me. We can share phone numbers and discuss over the phone in more detail if you like.

Scott


----------



## Model Man (Oct 1, 2007)

Wow! I gotta have a 350 NX-2k to go with my Refit! 

I'm looking to get Vaderman's 350 BoP and was simply going to lace the interior with wooden popsicle and skewer sticks and brass piping whether it needs it or not. I suppose at 4.5', the Excel would need something more sturdy. Buttress the plastic as much as possible -potentially it could be double-hulled in critical areas?

But as with the 350Refit, perhaps a 'proper armature' might be an after-market 'accessory' (such as if someone were to do PE detail work) to help keep the costs as far down as possible? 

Eagerly awaiting her deployment.
Tom


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Everyone: thank you so much for your replies to date. I am much encouraged at your responses for this project!

OK: Agreed, .020 is too thin (sometimes my mild dyslexia makes me think in reverse...). I am planning on making sections modifiable to the NX, NCC and 1701B versions. Also, for support, the internal armature is would be designed in; I'd want the kit as complete for you all as possible. I do like the idea of a side mount option, thanks.

Lighting would be optional, but the hull could be made with clear plastic sheet for lighting. I do like Model Man's idea of possibly double hulling for strength in necessary areas, but the internal armature might negate the need for it.

I will definitely female mold it for the sharpest detail. 

Vaderman, I'll PM you. Your advice would be invaluable.

I'll make some images from my last Lightwave file of the Excelsior (still needs work) that I would be using for cross-sectioning data and post them here.

:wave:

David


----------



## Trekkie75 (Mar 29, 2009)

It sure looks like your work is cut out for you David. 

By the sounds of things this little project will neither be easy or cheap, but as with anything there's a will there's a way.

But I would be enormously impressed if your NX/NCC-2k/1701-B turns out nearly equal to the Polar Lights refit/1701-A in quality, in which case I would be more than tempted to put down the wad for one, as long as you make all the correct transparent parts for its proper illumination. 

Just seeing those long Excelsior nacelles alone at 1/350 would be a sight to behold.

Post #1 on HobbyTalk, hello everyone!:wave:


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

> Post #1 on HobbyTalk, hello everyone!


Welcome to the Forums!!!

.


----------



## starseeker (Feb 1, 2006)

Good luck on your project! I've been planning to do exactly the same thing for a long time now. Maybe you'll inspire me to finally get off my butt. The studio version was vac formed so it's certainly do-able in 1/350. While the 2000 saucer is reasonably flat, when you're vac forming the plastic tends to pull really thin around or into parts with steeper curves. You're going to have to experiment with plastic thicknesses to get one that will be thick enough, but I wouldn't go with anything less than .060. 
It's certainly not an expensive to make a vac model, even at this size. You can use anything for your masters. My 1/24 flying sub master is just a few dozen slices of scrap plywood covered with a finish layer of good auto body filler ($15 T). As long as the master is strong enough not to warp, the top layer of the master is all that matters. Female molds are the only way to go. Your only other expenditure is scrap wood for boxes and plaster to fill the boxes to make your molds. 
4' x 8' sheets of styrene are available very cheaply at any large plastics supplier. Total outlay for everything could be less than $60. Plus about 3,000 hours of labor (actually, the whole ship is really simple - literally designed for vac forming - except that monster of a neck). Styrene can vary greatly in stiffness from one manufacturer to another. If at all possible, find something stiff, or use another type of plastic that is stiff enough (you'll have to check with your local supplier for what have, maybe even try ABS) and you may not need internal bracing. 
Another alternative if you're going the female mold (hugely recommended as you can capture all the detail you want built into the surface of your model) route: I've done a lot of vac forming and it works really well and if well built the models can be every bit as solid as injection kits and you can end up with a 24" Jupiter 2 or 1/350 1701 for about $30 total, etc, but if you're willing to shell out maybe another $100, you could build your 2000 in fiber glass. Huge advantage for Trek kits is that you can make the hulls translucent, which means instead of drilling and filling, you can just mask and paint over for all the windows. Best source for info about fiber glassing is the library and books on canoe or boat building or making telescope tubes and don't miss the on-line articles by David Merriman. Or a visit to your local canoe building shop. Slightly steeper learning curve to fiber glass and smellier and messier, but but only slightly. You don't have to deal with making a vac form machine, figure out a way of softening the plastic (which involves making frames [either make the frames out of aluminum or baltic birch plywood, don't use regular plywood unless it's +1/2" or your frames will just fall apart over time] [ideally you'd want multiple frames for the various sizes of plastic you're pulling, and depending on how thick they are, they can become heavy and unwieldy], vacuum sources, etc. It's not at all hard to do, just somewhat involved. I get about one perfect pull for every 4 tries. But if you go female molds, I'm thinking that fiber glass might actually be the easier way to go. I'm really excited about trying it for the first time on my flying subs (as soon as it's warm enough to work outside). 
Another vac form alternative is to not do the forming yourself, but if you have a plastic manufacturer nearby (Yellow Pages) see if they'll do the forming for you, perhaps after hours. (As a telescope maker, I've had many, many parts built after hours for a case of beer or $20 by guys who think it's a fun change of pace. If you're going to mass produce, they'll charge you shop rates, but if it's a one off and something cool, they really seem to love doing it).
And I'm sure looking fwd to further lurking and watching your progress. Again, good luck!


----------



## irishtrek (Sep 17, 2005)

Those of us who would be interested should be able to modify the kit for a side mount if it helps to keep the price on the low side. Of course that would depend on how much of a difference there would be in the cost?


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Hi Guys,

Here are some renders of Excelsior in Lightwave. There's still work to be done on it: the Tie Fighter thingees are wayyy too huge (a first try), the thickness of the neck is right for the vanes but not thick enough for the outer wall inside the vanes, and gotta add all sorts of stuff. 

The lower sensor dome gives you an idea as to the detail I'm striving for. This is all work done based on pictures. The saucer works out to 600 feet, the engines are 800 feet. OL is 1531.

I looked into using acrylic sheet as a template material for making the shaping device of the primary hull halves using plaster for the positive master. I'm told that once plaster is dry it is very hard to work, like a stick of chalk that construction workers use. I have to wonder what tools can inscribe plaster and whether a female mold and 060 or 080 styrene sheet can capture that thin a detail.

I have an old Excelsior vac kit that was based on the LM one. Can't remember the manufacturer's name off the bat, but my point is this: it appears to have been pulled from female molds, but the detail is awfully soft. Things like the deflector grid lines are rendered with a lot of garbage in them. Same with the overall surface of the pull that contacted the mold.

Vaderman, I'll call you Tuesday afternoon, when I get home from work, about 3pm AZ time (PST right now).

From RELs work I can see why he uses fiberglass: it appears to capture exceptionally fine detail.

Starseeker, I PM'd you for permission to use your Excelsior blueprints to finesse the Lightwave model for use in making this project. I'm asking publicly if it would be okay with you to use them. They would be very helpful. Please?

Some more renders soon.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Here are some more renders.
:wave:


----------



## Magesblood (May 12, 2008)

do you have this?

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3556/3400716518_0cb9ce71fa_b.jpg

I'm trying to figure out how to give you the full 3,000 x 4,400 pixel version.

stand by...

here we go.

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y131/SG1fan1/nxorthos0me.jpg


----------



## starseeker (Feb 1, 2006)

charonjr: sorry, I somehow totally missed that (and my fault, too - at some point I accidentally nuked my pms while trying to open them. And mostly I just lurk w/o signing in so things get missed). Feel free to use them in any way that you see fit. 
Love what I see so far. Your project has me really excited. All best.


----------



## Vaderman (Nov 2, 2002)

David,

I look forward to your call. 

In regards to material, you should look at using expanding foam. Smooth-on sells it. It is easy to sand to shape. After that, you can take bondo body filler to give it a hard skin coat. 

Scott


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Vaderman, my apologies for not calling today. I spaced it...my Mom's passing has left me feeling in a fog. I forgot until it was after six. However, Wed is my day off, so you are the first thing on my list tomorrow.

Starseeker, thank you! And Mage - NICE, where did those come from? I have yet to examine them for accuracy, but a first peek, they're impressive. 

What does everyone else think?

Let's all pray that the 4/1 Worm doesn't nuke my laptop.... Good luck tomorrow, all of you.


----------



## irishtrek (Sep 17, 2005)

Don't know if you've looked at starsekkers drawings fom a couple of years ago but they are pretty accurate for panel lines.
His drawings are here some where, just have to find them if you haven't already.


----------



## Magesblood (May 12, 2008)

jr, I forget where I got that huge pic. It was so long ago.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Irishtrek and Magesblood, thanks to you I found them in an old drive. The pic is great.

Vaderman, I'll try calling in a short bit: my sister came over and we've been dealing with my Mom's belongings all day.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Vaderman, 

Apologies, I left a message, but when I got home, I didn't realize it was so late. I'll try again tomorrow or Friday. My bad.


----------



## Vaderman (Nov 2, 2002)

I got your message. Call me tonight aroundf 7:00pm EST. 

Scott


----------



## Trekkie75 (Mar 29, 2009)

Will this kit involve alot of aztec masking? 

Is it even still happening?


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

> Is it even still happening?


A project of this magnitude takes a lot of planning and even more to FAB correctly.
Don't always assume the worst just because you do not get daily updates or shipping schedules. The Proteus kit on a different thread has been _over four years_ in creation and that is just a 1/72 scale kit of a small subject.

.


----------



## Trekkie75 (Mar 29, 2009)

Richard Baker said:


> A project of this magnitude takes a lot of planning and even more to FAB correctly.
> Don't always assume the worst just because you do not get daily updates or shipping schedules. The Proteus kit on a different thread has been _over four years_ in creation and that is just a 1/72 scale kit of a small subject.
> 
> .


Modeling is a new world for me, so forgive my greenhorness... 

But I now understand that most kit concepts take many months or years if ever to achieve realization. In any case it will be about that long before I could ever tackle a project of this magnitude. 

I would probably try my hand at a 1/350th PL Refit Enterprise first, and judging by what I've seen and read in this forum and elsewhere, that kit seems challenging enough to finish in any way that does justice to it.

Anyway a 1/350th Excelsior is a great idea for those experienced and determined enough to take it on, much as the 1/260th DeBoer Refit...


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

The 1/350 Refit kit is wonderful- the Hangar Deck/Cargo Bay is almost a kit unto itself. It can be built stock of you can take it to the next level with detail parts and correction kits. I do recommend using paint masks for the Aztecing though- it is very time consuming and there are no real reference panels to use to separate the colors. The kit will be re-released sometime in the future and it will have masks with it this time around, bu tyou can find the kit now on eBay and there are several companies with aztec masks. The kit is also designed to allow lighting so you might want to consider that also.

.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Hi guys,

Yes, the kit is still on and it will take a while to develop properly. I've talked with Vaderman last week about some ways to pursue making the masters. My homework is to take the Bondo I've bought and practice making a smooth layer on a block of styrene foam block, then sand and inscribe details on to it.

Regarding Aztec painting, that's yet to be determined. Most are doing this themselves, or using templates that others are making to guide them. PL is re-releasing the Refit with aztec decals. So, that's another possibility for those interested in taking on that project. I've never designed 2D decals to be applied to a 3D surface...I don't know where to begin on that. 

One major factor for me to focus on is keeping the cost of this kit reasonable and providing as high a quality kit that I can. This takes research, a lot of it, into the subject and the techniques I have to learn to make a replica of it.

One question that came up while I was thinking over the NX, NCC, 1701B versions has to do with the different bridges. There are fairly clear images of the NX and 1701B bridges, but the image of the NCC version (while they fly thru the wave) is unclear. Looking at the old AMT models the NCC and 1701B have similar shapes, the former round and the latter an oval shape. Can anyone confirm the NCC bridge shape?

I actually had some more renders ready to post when I decided to backup up my harddrive to an external drive. Using Gparted, I'd planned to erase my old backup, as it's 9 months old and replace it with my current version. Alas, I erased my laptop harddrive instead (since Mom passed, I've been a liiittttlllleee foggy!). Now I'm using my 9 month old backup. aaarrggghh!

I'll do my best to update, though it won't be daily. But Excelsior is moving forward. By putting this on this board, I've committed myself to this project and it's completion.


----------



## Model Man (Oct 1, 2007)

I don't know if it's been said yet, but even if it has, condolences on your loss. 

Regarding the 2d-3d decal design. Could you not do some texture mapping? I forget what package you were using, I'm familiar with Maya and XSI so can speak in those terms. 

If I had the geometry, I would get screen caps, align the model and bake the texture in. Once you've got the UV's, you should be set. Export those and you've got 2d texture maps with the actual textures. Rough ones to work up from at least. Theoretically, anyway. 

But this is something for much further down the road of course. It all starts w/ nailing that geometry.

Best luck with it!
Tom


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Modelman,

Thanks for my Mom.

I use Lightwave.

David


----------



## Trekkie75 (Mar 29, 2009)

Charon

I think I just struck gold for you.:thumbsup:

http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/scans/excelsior1.htm


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

I have heard of baking textures in, but never tried it. I know Lightwave uses UV as well, I'll grab the manual.

Vaderman, I'll call you today. I expect that my self assigned homework is in error: I don't think I'm supposed to apply the bondo to styrene foam directly. I've ordered Smooth-On FoamIt 10 trial per Vaderman's advice. I know that can be applied between foamcore ribs and sanded to shape. Maybe the bondo goes over that?

As you all can see, my thinking is fuzzy right now. The grief process affects me in many different ways. That is one of them.:freak:

Trekkie75, thanks! You've answered the NCC bridge question with that site. I actually have that image printed out and used it for the Excelsior bridge in my Lightwave model. Interesting that the AMT kit has the bridge circular, not oval as clearly portrayed here.


----------



## Trekkie75 (Mar 29, 2009)

Some more helpful images.


----------



## irishtrek (Sep 17, 2005)

Charonjr those images that trekkie75 posted show the difference between the nx and ncc versions of the Excelsior, with the nx being from ST III and the ncc from ST VI.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Yes, Irishtrek, I agree. Apparently, the NCC bridge is the same used on the 1701B/. I double checked the AMT kits, the bridges are nearly identical, only minor details changed. The impulse block details are quite different, as well as the details of the shape of the top of deck 3.


----------



## Trekkie75 (Mar 29, 2009)

Charonjr, if you can only do one version for starters I suggest the NCC. Its sort of a middle of the road average between NX and 1701b, with it probably being my favorite of the three.


----------



## irishtrek (Sep 17, 2005)

To converrt the AMT ncc into the nx all you would need for the bridge anyway is a dome the right shape and size, but for the rest it won't be that easy if you should decide to do it.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

I have some ideas on how to modularize the kit that should make the choice and assembly of the various versions easier to accomplish....


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Update... Got the FoamIt 10 in today, so I'll start cutting the foamcore into some shapes to approximate the saucer edge and play with the materials. I have to mount the foamcore shapes, use the FoamIt expanding urethane foam to fill the volumes in between the foamcore shapes, let it harden, sand it down, put bondo on it to make a hard shell and sand it smooth, and try my hand at putting scribed details onto that. Whew! This is gonna be fun!


----------



## Vaderman (Nov 2, 2002)

Just take your time and have fun doing it. :thumbsup:

Scott


----------



## Trekkie75 (Mar 29, 2009)

charonjr said:


> Update... Got the FoamIt 10 in today, so I'll start cutting the foamcore into some shapes to approximate the saucer edge and play with the materials. I have to mount the foamcore shapes, use the FoamIt expanding urethane foam to fill the volumes in between the foamcore shapes, let it harden, sand it down, put bondo on it to make a hard shell and sand it smooth, and try my hand at putting scribed details onto that. Whew! This is gonna be fun!


Don't rush it, its more important to have things like this done right than quickly. But I'll be eagerly awaiting updates as the weeks and months go by, and in the meantime I'll promise to be patient and to keep myself busy on other projects.

Good luck...:thumbsup:


----------



## lizzybus (Jun 18, 2005)

Just seeing those ExAstris shots makes me drool like Homer.........

if this gets off the ground....i am soooo in!!!! (please...NOT the "B">>>)

Rich


----------



## Trekkie75 (Mar 29, 2009)

lizzybus said:


> Just seeing those ExAstris shots makes me drool like Homer.........
> 
> if this gets off the ground....i am soooo in!!!! (please...NOT the "B">>>)
> 
> Rich


Don't worry, you'll get your NX or NCC-2000 whenever its ready.:thumbsup:

But expect a wait however...


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Thanks for the support, everybody. I'm working on learning the techniques for making the master first. I'll post pics of my experimentation.


----------



## DUNCANIDAHO0420 (Apr 29, 2009)

*Excelsior Scale*

What sort of interest would there be in a kit this size? Would it be better to do a smaller kit sized to the AMT refit (about 33").

Understand this: I am going with the officially stated length of the Excelsior of 1531 feet. I won't brook an argument on this.

David[/QUOTE]

WOW. HEY DAVID, MY NAME IS BUCK. I'M NOT LOOKING TO ARGUE WITH YOU BRO, BUT I GOT SOME INFO YOU WILL WANT TO KNOW B4 YOU START ON THAT 350 SCALE EXCELSIOR. I HOPE THIS HELPS YOU OUT. I HAVE ONE OF THOSE LARGE SCALE EXCELSIORS JUST LIKE I MEMBER ON THIS SITE WHO GOES BY THE MEMBER ID OF: b26354. HE WAS ASKING THE SAME QUESTION I WAS AS TO WHO MADE MY EXCELSIOR. THAT’S HOW I ENDED UP HERE TALKING TO YOU GUYS. HIS EXCELSIOR IS 43 IN. AND MADE OF POLYESTER FIBERGLASS RESIN AND POLY-URETHANE CASING RESIN EXACTLY THE SAME AS MINE. HE POSTED AN IMAGE OF IT. A FELLOW TREK FAN ASK ME ABOUT MINE TODAY, IT’S HIS FAVORITE SHIP, WANTS ONE BADLY, IF IT’S THE LUNAR KIT WITH THE NX2000 DECALS. TOLD I DON’T KNOW, I NEVER SEEN THE LUNAR KIT BUT MINE CAME WITH NX2000 DECALS. TOM STEWART OF SUPER COLLECTOR FAME SOLD IT TO ME IN 1991 FOR $250.00. I WANTED IT FOR THE REASON I BELIEVED TO BE THE FACT THAT IT WAS IN THE SAME SCALE AS THE AMT ENTERPRISE A. I TOLD THIS GUY I WOULD RESEARCH IT AND GET BACK TO HIM. FIRST PLACE I GO IS STARSHIP MODELER AND DISCOVER THEY LIST TWO EXCELSIORS, ONE BY LUNAR AND ANOTHER BY THE COLLECTIVE. AT 1/448 SCALE. NOT THE WELL KNOWN 1/537 SCALE OF THE AMT ENTERPRISE. I WAS BUMMED. I WAS JUST GOING TO DUMP THE KIT FOR NOT BEING IN THE CONSISTENT SCALE. BUT I GOT TO THINKING. WHY WOULD ANYONE MAKE AN EXCELSIOR IN THIS GOOFY SCALE? NOT TO SCALE WITH THE ENTERPRISE? C’MON! I’M A MASTER MODEL BUILDER, FABRICATOR, MOLD MAKER…THE FIRST THING ONE DOES WHEN EMBARKING ON AN PROJECT THAT INCLUDED FABRICATING MASTERS FOR MOLDING AND PRODUCING MULTIPLE POSITIVES IS TO GET THE SCALE DOWN. PERIOD. WHO WOULD MAKE AN EXCELSIOR OUT OF SCALE? YOU WOULD SELL FAR MORE UNITS IF IT WERE IN SCALE. I MEAN WHO DOSEN’T WANT A EXCELSIOR CRUISEING ALONG SIDE THEIR ENTERPRISE. THE ANSWER TO BOTH IS: NOBODY. SOMETHINGS NOT RIGHT. SO, I PULL OUT MY JACKILL’S STAR FLEET REFERENCE MANUAL SHIPS OF THE STAR FLEET VOL. 3 AND LA! ON PAGE 04:02:03:02: EXCELSIOR OVERALL LENGTH: 467.05 METERS. X 39.37 IN. TO A METER GIVES ME 18,388 IN. DIVIDED BY 12IN. TO THE FOOT. MAKES HER 1532.4 FT. RIGHT THERE AT YOUR 1531 FT. OF UNBROOKED ARGUEMENT. SO I THINKS ABOUT IT. AGAIN, WHY WOULD ANYONE MAKE THE KIT 42.5 INCHES LONG? THAT’S HOW LONG MINE IS. I JUST STUCK IT ALL TOGETHER WITH CLAY AND DUCT TAPE SO I COULD GET A VERY PRECISE OVERALL LENGTH MEASUREMENT. WHAT DATA RESOURCE WOULD THE GUY WHO MADE THESE USE TO COME UP WITH SCALE? I GOT MINE IN 1991. ERIC’S JACKILL’S MANUAL VOL. 3 SHOWS A COPYWRITE OF 1995. SO THEY DIDN’T USE THAT. WELL, I GO TO MY BLUEPRINT LOCKER AND PULL OUT MY OLD INGRAM CLASS EXCELSIOR BLUEPRINTS IN THE PLASTIC FOLDER, THE “OFFICIAL DATAPACK” BY STARSTATION AURORA COPYWRITE 1986. HMMM, THIS IS PROBABLY WHAT I WOULD USE. WONDER IF THEY LIST A DIFFERENT OVERALL LENGTH? VIOLA’! SHEET 1: OUTBOARD PROFILE OVERALL LENGTH: 590.6 METERS X 39.37 IN. PER METER COMES TO 23,252 IN. DIVIDED BY 12 IN. PER FT. IS 1937.66 FT. 23,252 IN. DIVIDED BY MY EXCELSIOR’S 42.5 IN. LENGTH WORKS OUT TO 547 OR 1/547 SCALE. WELL THAT’S MUCH CLOSER TO 1/537 THAN 1/448 SCALE. BUT ACTUALLY JACKILL’S 18,388 IN. DIVIDED BY 42.5 IN. COMES TO 433 OR 1/433 SCALE WHICH SEALS IT FOR ME. BUT THAT’S NOT THE KICKER. INGRAM CLASS BLUEPRINTS SHEET 7: OUTBOARD TOP VIEW COMPARISON, FOR THESE PLANS HAVE SEVERAL SHEETS IN COMPARE WITH AN ENTERPRISE A! A BUNCH OF YOU ARE BREAKING YOUR BLUEPRINTS OUT RIGHT NOW…AND SHEET 7 SHOWS AN ENTERPRISE OVERLAYED ON TOP OF THE EXCELSIOR WITH THE VERY FORWARD EDGE OF THE ENTERPRISE’S SAUCER TOUCHING THE VERY REAR EDGE OF THE EXCELSIOR’S IMPULSE DRIVE, SO THAT THE ENTERPRISE LENGTH TERMINATE’S AT THE NACELLE JUST 30 SCALE METERS FROM THE END OF THE EXCELSIOR’S NACELLE. SO. SO I THEN TAKE MY 22IN. AMT ENTERPRISE AND LAY IT OVER MY 42.5 IN. EXCELSIOR WITH THE ENTERPRISE SAUCER FORWORD LEADING EDGE BUTTED UP AGAINST THE EXCELSIOR’S IMPULSE DRIVE…TAYLOR MADE. SPOT ON MATCH WITH THE BLUEPRINTS. ERGO, EXCELSIOR IS 23,252 IN. LONG. DIVIDE THAT BY 350 OR POLAR LIGHTS 1/350 SCALE AND THAT COMES OUT TO, OH, 66.43 IN. LONG OR 5 FT. 6 ½ IN. IN LENGTH. PRETTY BIG. I WORKED AT FLIK FX IN HOLLYWOOD ON A 1/1 SCALE JEEP LIBERTY WE HAD TO SCULPT OUT OF 4LB. RIGID FOAM FOR A COMMERCIAL. THEY WANTED A 1/1 SCALE INVISIBLE JEEP SHAPE TO GO THRU A WATERFALL IN THE COMMERCIAL. FLIK FX HAS ONE OF THE LARGEST VACUFORM MACHINES I HAVE EVER SEEN MUCH LESS USED. 8 FOOT X 4 FOOT STANDARD SUBSRATE SIZE VACUFORM. TOOK FOUR PEOPLE WORKING IN UNISON TO OPERATE THIS THING WITH 3/8 IN. THICK CLEAR 4X8 SHEETS TO GET THE PARTS WE NEEDED AND WE TRASHED A FEW SHEETS GETTING SWEET PULLS OUT OF IT. THEY HAD TO BE STRONG ENUF TO SUPPORT IT’S OWN WEIGHT. ON THE OTHER HAND, JIM KEYS’ 7 FOOT T.O.S. ENTERPRISE SKINS WERE EPOXY RESIN WITH FIBERGLASS FIBERS BRUSHED UP IN SILICONE MOLDS ABIT LESS THAN 1/8 IN. THICKNESS TO MAKE UP FULLY LIT, SOLID STARSHIPS WITH A SIMPLE SMART INTERNAL ARMATURE THAT RIVALED ILMS STUDIO MODELS. BY THE WAY, I GOTS LOTS OF HIGH PIXAL DIGITAL PHOTO IMAGES OF MY EXCELSIOR ALONG WITH EXCELSIOR/ ENTERPRISE COMPARES IF ANYONE IS INTERESTED. 
IN ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION DAVID, A LOT OF PEOPLE WOULD BE INTERESTED IN BOTH A DECENT 537 SCALE AND 350 SCALE EXCELSIOR. THAT’S WHAT I CALL A “HOLE” IN THE MARKET. THERE ARE SEVERAL HOLES IN THE STAR TREK SCALE MODEL MARKET. THAT IS WHY I HAVE THE ONLY LARGE SCALE FULLY LIT BORG CUBE AT 24”X 24”X 24” WITH BORG QUEEN LAUNCH TUBE AND QUEEN’S SPHERE ENHANCED WITH FIBER OPTICS USING BOTH POLYESTER FIBERGLASS RESIN AND POLY-URETHANE CASTING RESIN. I AM FINISHED MAKING MY CLASS 4 TACTICAL CUBE ARMOR PANELS MASTERS SO WE CAN UPGRADE OUR CUBES. I CAN TOTALLY SEE PEOPLE WANTING TO THROW ALL THEIR LITTLE FLEETS OF STARSHIPS AT ONE OF MY NIGHTMARE ULTRA FLAT BLACK MONSTROSITIES. MY MOLDS ARE READY TO PRODUCE KITS, I’M JUST WORKING OUT THE MATERIALS FUNDING I NEED. I HAVE OVER 500 IMAGES OF THE COMPLETE FABRICATION PROCESS AND FINAL FINISHED GREEN GLOWING BLACK SCARY THING. EMAIL ME WITH ANY QUESTIONS.

THE BORG HAVE ENTERED THE BATTLEFIELD. RESISTANCE IS FUTILE.


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

MIght have some interesting points but I am not up to reading Screaming CAPITAL letters this morning...


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Buck, I PM'd you. Sorry about erroneously calling you Duncan.

I am curious to see how Nilo Rodis determined his scale versus what we actually see. Certainly canon has each Enterprise variant larger than the last, and the 1531 Rodis figure is the only "official" figure I have to rely on.

Right now, I'll go ahead and throw open the argument vis-a-vis that Excelsior was bigger than the stated length. (Don't know why I'm doing this....) Anyway, I'll continue to research and plan the model using the Nilo Rodis length until time comes to actually lay the ship into physical reality. I'll entertain the size issue, if we can come up with demonstrable proofs.

What is important though is that I would like to see cogent arguments. If anyone can, for instance, compare the size of the windows on both Excelsior and Enterprise as a function of their respective arcs and work out from there what the size of Excelsior should be, that would be a step to proving your argument. 

My mathematics is in the dumpster and I'm having to re-learn the basics, so I can lay out and cut out a precise circle that can be angled into the desired conical shape (i.e. the saucer's outer rim). It'll save time in the long run to actually know these equations. If anyone can lead me in the right direction for the equations that would be great as my old books are in storage.


----------



## starseeker (Feb 1, 2006)

DUNCANIDAHO0420 said:


> Understand this: I am going with the officially stated length of the Excelsior of 1531 feet. I won't brook an argument on this.
> 
> David


Despite what's written by fans (and the people who work for Paramount and who produce the endless cash crop of ST related books are not connected with the shows and are literally no more than glorified (paid) fans), there's plenty of room for debate about the size of all the ships used in the movies. Rodis's wonderful Klingon ship has at least three different sizes, and one of them might actually make sense. Even if the designers of the 2000 had a size in mind when they started, by the time filming was done, all of that was out the window. 
There is no "correct" size for the 2000. If you want it to be about the same size as the 1701, go for it. If you want it to be two or three times as long as the 1701, be happy with that. 
I did some "scale" drawings on another thread:

http://www.hobbytalk.com/bbs1/showthread.php?t=179044

My reasoning for what I chose for the scale is there. I think my arguments make sense but that's all they are, just one more attempt to try to make sense of the size of the 2000. 
But whatever models or kits you have of the 2000, if they are well detailed and well proportioned, be happy that you have them! Whatever scale you think they are. It's a beautiful ship.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

I read your thread, Starseeker, now you've really got me thinking! May have to do this ship in 2 sizes, as Rodis "planned" and as, ultimately, realized.... Thinking....

One thing makes sense: assuming the rim windows are the same sizes on both the 1000' Enterprise and the 1531' Excelsior, which are really both 8 foot models, then the Excelsior model windows would have to be 66% the size of the windows of the Enterprise model. 

Anyone know Photoshop well enough to do a window size comparison for the rims of both vessels? Seeing the difference could give us a more precise figure.


----------



## Gunstar1 (Mar 1, 2007)

The saucer height (edge to edge): Excelsior = 1.444x height of Enterprise


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

FSM, thanks, that'll be great and I look forward to any information you can make available.

Gunstar, thanks for the pic and the saucer height assessment, I'll take it into consideration, too. I see how the height is derived (2.6544/1.8382=1.444), but I am curious regarding the figures in the pic, what are they referring to? Enterprise 1.8382 and Excelsior 2.6544? What is the 1 unit reference, please? (It's almost 2am, maybe it'll pop out at me in the morning....  )


----------



## Gunstar1 (Mar 1, 2007)

I did vector trace shapes on top of the actual photos. I then sized the trace shapes so that the width of the circle windows would match (the excelsior's window is a little squished vertically since the angle of the saucer rim is much further from 90 degrees than the Enterprise's) thus giving comparative sizes of the saucer rim height. The unit of measurement is arbitrary - default of the software - doesn't matter.

This is the best one can do - measuring just a local area for comparison - unless someone took high-end photos of the unlit models. You can't trust screencaps because the light intensity/exposure exaggerates the window size - and the image is not clear enough to take detail measurements 

So - based on making the windows the same size, whatever scale you want to use, the height of the saucer rim of the Excelsior is 1.444 times greater than the Enterprise's rim.

That should give you enough to figure out the size given that you have the specs for the enterprise and then you can make measurements of the Excelsior with an established scale - you'd have to start by finding the right photo of a side view (from the front) of the saucer, then you could get the diameter and so on.

Have fun measuring! :wave:


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

Determining a size from such a small element like the size of a window can cause problems- like sizing a building by a brick. Maybe a larger element like the distance center to center of rows (deck height) might get a better result.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Gunstar1, thanks. Right, already we're talking about a smaller Excelsior if we use the 1.444 to multiply all figures: Excelsior would be 1444 ft long compared to Enterprise in that instance, so seeing the arguments for much longer sizes indicates that the window sizes were not well paid attention to for scale when the shooting model was made. This thought may not be correct. Richard, I'll try your suggestion.

An additional question that I should have asked to begin with: if any of you had your druthers (and I know I'm opening a can of worms here), what size model would anyone want to see? I ask because there are differing ideas as to the length of the ship, therefore the length of a 1/350 model comes into question. If we use Starseeker's 2000', the model would be a whopping 68.5 (roughly) inches in length, compared to the 52 inch (again roughly) length if she's at 1531-ish feet. Granted this was an argument I'd hoped to avoid, but it's your living space, guys. Let's see what you'd think would be ideal.


----------



## Gunstar1 (Mar 1, 2007)

I think you misunderstood - don't multiply Enterprise dimensions by 1.444 to get any excelsior dimensions - this was to give you the height of the saucer rim - which is clearly (in the world of star trek) not the same height as the Enterprise's rim. I don't know off the top of my head how tall the saucer rim of the Enterprise is in terms of feet, but:
Enterprise length = 1000'
Enterprise Rim height = X'
Excelsior Rim Height = 1.444(X)' regardless of how many floors are within
Once you get the height of the rim in feet, then get measure diameter of saucer with that frame of reference, then the whole ship with THAT frame of reference.

Make sense now?


----------



## Model Man (Oct 1, 2007)

Charon,
Jim Key's has essentially answered your question with his fiberglass version of the B. 53"
http://www.customreplicas.com/Enterprise_B.htm


----------



## Trekkie75 (Mar 29, 2009)

Charonjr,

Around 52 inches is my absolute upper limit for an Excelsior model, as stunning as it would be 68.5" just puts things way over the top for what can live with me. If you must go by Starseeker's 2000' then I suggest rescale to 1/537 like the AMT/Ertl 22" Refit Enterprise.

I wonder how the longer length for Excelsior/Enterprise-B compares to the Enterprise-C (Ambassador class)? I would accept equal length for Enterprises B and C, but to think there was a longer earlier ship just doesn't sit well with me.


----------



## starseeker (Feb 1, 2006)

I didn't go by window size so much as by what the windows suggested, the # of decks behind them.


----------



## irishtrek (Sep 17, 2005)

On EAS there is an article about the size of the Excelsior that shows an image of both ships and the size/thickness of the saucer rims.
It says the erefit is 6.5 meters while the 2000 is 6 meters. If that helps any.


----------



## Gunstar1 (Mar 1, 2007)

But from the photos of the studio models in my post yesterday that is clearly not the case....


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Today, I'm short of time. Gunstar1, I understand and will try that method. I did an initial measurement of the diameter of the saucer at 600 feet (iirc). But these suggested methods will help verify that. 

I do know that REL is making an Ent-B in fiberglass that is 1/350 scale. I don't expect it to be in the price range of most of us, which is why I was thinking of a less expensive vacform approach. I just want to do it right though, not like the early attempts of Lunar Models and Collective. Hopefully, I'll learn better, newer techniques of fabrication that can yield better results, but still be inexpensive.

Irishtrek,
You mentioned EAS, what is that? Your description sounds kinda familiar....


----------



## Model Man (Oct 1, 2007)

Rel is making a 350 as well as Jim Key? 

Trekkie75, Jim Key's C comes in at ~59", so it is a bit bigger than Excelsior at ~53". Jim's D and E are 1/650, so the comparison gets lost unless you do a little extra math. Don't remmebr those sizes. I think the E was 70+" @ 1/650 though. Check that previous link and go up one level.


----------



## starseeker (Feb 1, 2006)

It was on post #32 of this thread
http://www.hobbytalk.com/bbs1/showthread.php?t=179044&page=3
where I did my saucer edge comparison. What I liked about it was that the saucer edge hatches were the same size.


----------



## irishtrek (Sep 17, 2005)

charonjr said:


> Today, I'm short of time. Gunstar1, I understand and will try that method. I did an initial measurement of the diameter of the saucer at 600 feet (iirc). But these suggested methods will help verify that.
> 
> I do know that REL is making an Ent-B in fiberglass that is 1/350 scale. I don't expect it to be in the price range of most of us, which is why I was thinking of a less expensive vacform approach. I just want to do it right though, not like the early attempts of Lunar Models and Collective. Hopefully, I'll learn better, newer techniques of fabrication that can yield better results, but still be inexpensive.
> 
> ...


Just go to the links section on www.starshipmodeler.com for star trek the scroll down about 3-4 links looking for exatris something then clikc on the link.


----------



## Vaderman (Nov 2, 2002)

Model Man said:


> Rel is making a 350 as well as Jim Key?
> 
> Trekkie75, Jim Key's C comes in at ~59", so it is a bit bigger than Excelsior at ~53". Jim's D and E are 1/650, so the comparison gets lost unless you do a little extra math. Don't remmebr those sizes. I think the E was 70+" @ 1/650 though. Check that previous link and go up one level.


Actually I believe it is a collaborative effort between both parties. At least that is what I heard.

Scott


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Hey Guys, yeah Sovereign Replicas is doing a 53" B which is using the 1531 foot length. Their model is fiberglass, iirc. It'll be expensive and likely will have more detail than vacform can do.

Starseeker, thanks for the thread. I'll read it, too.

Vaderman, I have been running behind due to depression, but my mood is lifting. I'm doing an experimental setup with the Foam It this weekend. 

Meantime, I'm researching the Excelsior and B to do comparisons on subtle features and see what existed on the NX before the NCC refit and the B refit.

The 1531 Ex would be 34.21 inches at 1/537. The 1531 Ex would be 52.49 inches at 1/350.

Anyone have other sizes they might be interested in that I could consider?


----------



## irishtrek (Sep 17, 2005)

If you are reffering to the E-B then it should be about 2 meters or 6.5 feet longer.
Don't forget there are just over 39 inches to a meter and the 2000 is listed as 467m while the E-B is listed at 469m.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Guys, I'm having to put the project on hold for awhile. I had surgery last week (repair of an umbilical hernia) and just spent two days in the VA hospital due to an accidental insulin overdose and the eruption of colitis. There's nothing like almost dying to make you think about how much you want to live.

I'll get back to you all when I am back on my feet.


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

Sorry to hear that- my thoughts are with you.


----------



## Vaderman (Nov 2, 2002)

David,

Sorry to heare about the health problems. I am glad you are OK. My thoughts and prayers are with you. As I have said to you before, build at your own pace, don't worry about how long it will take. Just enjoy it. Life is too short not to enjoy it.

Scott


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

thanks Scott and Richard. I'm still thinking about it, but it's hard to focus with all the meds I'm on. And I'm afraid, really afraid. The cipro from the surgery evidently disrupted my immune system and opportunistic bacteria attacked my colon. They're having to use something like cipro, flagel, to kill the infection. I'm just finding that I am really having to take it easy. I'm on a liquid only diet for at least two weeks (I hate food commercials!). And Scott is right to remind me to take my time.

It's amazing how scared I am right now.


----------



## Richard Baker (Aug 8, 2006)

The important thing is that you are on the mend. 

Relax and take it slow and easy- this is sort of like a vacation, except you don't go anywhere, do anything and there is no t-shirt to buy.

.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

True. Thanks for bringing a smile to my face Richard.


----------



## Model Man (Oct 1, 2007)

Hey David,
More interested to hear how you have fared over the last few months than any updates on this project. Hope your recovery has gone well and you are doing much better in all regards! 
Cheers
-Tom


----------



## starseeker (Feb 1, 2006)

Seconded.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Dear Friends,
Thanks for your support. I am slowing getting better. Topped it all off with a tumble from a short set of stairs in the dark, spraining both my left ankle and left wrist. Plus dealing with depression due to experiencing bigotry from someone at the gym as I'm gay. Asking them to the movies, as a friend, set him off. And tomorrow is my dead mom's birthday. Just been a BAD year for me.

I've been wanting to get back to work on the Excelsior, which has been too long on the back burner. Re-reading your posts has convinced me that the best approach is slow, but steady. I have to make the tools and do it all by hand. No laser stereo watzitz, my Lightwave files are far too course and I'd have to spend a year rebuilding them for that approach. The expense is horrid.

Anyway, I'm trying to get back on my feet, but VA is declaring me permanently disabled, so there can't be any outside earnings from now on. Just SSDI. Oh well.

Take care, I'll keep reading and maybe I'll post a bit more often as I actually get something accomplished.

David


----------

