StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I did some analysis on the Discovery and came to the conclusion that the ships current scale is batshit insane.

Observation #1:
The ring sections of the saucer do not rotate. Only the upper and lower hull plating of both rings do rotate in opposing directions.
(Inner Ring Dorsal & Outer Ring Ventral counter-clockwise, Inner Ring Ventral & Outer Ring Dorsal Clockwise)

Assumption #1:
The length of 750.5 m given by Eaglemoss is a licensed product and currently the closest to canon available and therefore correct until superceded by canon onscreen material.
Length: 750.5 m
Width : 307.6 m
Height: 72.8 m

Assumption #2:
The crew quarters are only in the static parts of the saucer rings (Inner Ring facing the central sphere, Inner Ring facing towards Outer Ring and Outer Ring facing Inner ring).

Assumption #3:
The Saucer Rings have two decks with quarters limited to the area of the rings that has no rotating parts.

Assumption #4:
The living area has 50% quarters.
The rest are hallways, walls and other multipurpose rooms "rentable" for parties or other leisure time activities (as seen in 1.07 "Magic To Make the Sanest Man Go Mad")

Scaling an orthographic image of the Discovery to 7505 pixel gives a scale of 10 cm/px

Measuring the pixels from inner radius to outer radius of these static areas I get following numbers:

(inner radius / outer radius)

Inner Ring facing core-wards: 213 / 291 px or 21,3 / 29,1 m

Inner Ring facing rim-wards: 521 / 616 px or 52,1 / 61,6 m

Outer Ring facing core-wards: 715 / 843 px or 71,5 / 84,3 m

Calculating the area of these rings: (outer circle area - inner circle area) rounded to Integers.

Inner Ring core-wards: 5320 - 2850 = 2470 square meters
Inner Ring rim-wards: 23842 - 17055 = 6786 square meters
Outer Ring Core-wards: 44651 - 32121 = 12530 square meters

In total: 21787 square meters

Assumption #3 and #4 negate each other so we end up with a total of 21787 square meters solely for crew quarters.

The crew of the Discovery is given as 134 crew members in 1.05 "Choose your pain".
But Captain Lorca and the shuttle pilot were missing at the time.

At the San Diego Comic Con in 2018 the crew complement of the ISS Discovery was given as 180... So it can be assumed that this is a possible upper limit.

With that we get an average quarter size of...

136 crew : 21787 / 136 = 160
180 crew : 21787 / 180 = 121

If scaled down to similar saucer size of a TOS Constitution the numbers are a bit different:
Length: 421.3 m
Width : 172.7 m
Height: 41.0 m

Inner Ring core-wards: 770 square meters
Inner Ring rim-wards: 2128 square meters
Outer Ring Core-wards: 3903 square meters

Total: 6801 square meters

136 crew : 50
180 crew : 38

Result:

Under the given assumptions the Discovery Crew has between 121 to 160 square meters for quarters per person on average.

The downscaled Discovery still offers Crew 38-50 square meters on average and a bit bigger than those of the TOS Enterprise with roughly 30 square meters per crew member.

tezunegari wrote: ↑2018-10-29 09:32am If scaled down to similar saucer size of a TOS Constitution the numbers are a bit different:
Length: 421.3 m
Width : 172.7 m
Height: 41.0 m

When we see Discobiscuits and the Enterprise together on screen, she's a good chunk smaller. About 2/3 the length with a flatter profile.

You can scale the size of the ship from the show though.

Disco has what looks like 4 decks in the engineering section, 2 in the neck and inner saucer, and 1 in the outer saucer. Decks look like they're about 2.5m, and let's assume half a metre each side for Jeffries tubes and other gubbins. (Assuming that exterior lights are deck windows, which given that that's what they are in the flypast of Ent-A in TMP seems to be standard Starfleet construction methodology)

So the engineering section would be about 15-20m tall, and on rough scaling the whole ship would be about 9-10x longer than the engineering section is high. (Which does roughly fit with the 2/3 Constitution size it appears to be on screen, as the given length for that ship is 288m).

So, the Crossfield class is something of the order of 175m long

I'd think the best way to scale the DIscovery would be the bridge window, we see that both inside and outside the ship so it would give us a consistent point of reference.

Or the shuttle bay.
In "Context is King" we see that the Shuttle bay of the USS Glenn is about 3, maybe 4 shuttles high.
In "Lethe" we see Admiral Cornwell walking up the ramp of a shuttle and the actress is 1.7 meters tall.
The Shuttle in eyeballed comparison the the Admiral is about twice as tall.

So the shuttle bay door is about 3 * 3.4 m or 4 * 3.4 m.
Or between 10.2 and 13.6 m tall.

Measuring the image I have https://i.imgur.com/bKD99Mv.jpg
and scalint top and side view to the rear view...

I get for the 10.2 m shuttle bay door
Length: 656.2 m
Width : 267.6 m
Height: 63.6 m

and for the 13.6 m door
Length: 874.9 m
Width : 346.8 m
Height: 84.8 m

Having skimmed "Lethe" again the Shuttle bay of the Discovery seems to be different from that of the Glenn.
It seems to be lower and there's a middle part in the Glenn escape scene in the middle of the top of the bay door opening that is missing on the Discovery.

When Michael and Tyler leave to search for Spock... I mean Sarek the Shuttle bay door is about 2-2.5 times as tall as the shuttle.
That would mean between 6.8 and 8.5 meters.

Or
Length: 437.5 m / 546.8 m
Width : 178.4 m / 223.0 m
Height: 42.4 m / 53.0 m

Assumption #4:
The living area has 50% quarters.
The rest are hallways, walls and other multipurpose rooms "rentable" for parties or other leisure time activities (as seen in 1.07 "Magic To Make the Sanest Man Go Mad")

Where did you get 50% from ?

bilateralrope wrote: ↑2018-10-29 02:26pm

Assumption #4:
The living area has 50% quarters.
The rest are hallways, walls and other multipurpose rooms "rentable" for parties or other leisure time activities (as seen in 1.07 "Magic To Make the Sanest Man Go Mad")

Where did you get 50% from ?

Arbitrarily chosen, I admit that.
But it helps me to avoid accidentially posting the wrong numbers as both quarter and non-quarter area end up being the same.

percentage of crew quarters: eaglemoss scale / TOS-saucer size in square meters per crewmember

at 5%: 12-16 or 4-5
at 25%: 60-80 or 18-25
at 75%: 181-240 or 56-75
at 95%: 230-304 or 71-95

Even with the TOS-saucer size and only 25% of the area allocated to crew quarters the crew would have luxurious accomodations compared to modern day naval vessels.

I think the enlisted crew on a Nimitz/Ford have about <4 square meters per person (a bed and a small stowing space).

I did the same for calculations of the TOS-Constitution with 289 m and it resulted in around 30 square meters per crewmember (or if all crew quarters are located on one of the saucer main decks.

Well the thing is that while the Crossfield class is a dedicated scienceship, the Constitution class is a long range Explorer, so it's likely that the Constitution would have more space dedicated to crew quaters to house more specialists needed for varied situations the ship might encounter.

Memory Alpha(yes I know not best source) seems to agree with this with standard crew of the Crossfield being 136 crewmembers, while the Connie has 205 or 430 depending on the era.

I got my hands on the Discovery model used in the new Star Trek Online Login screen.
And assuming that it has the same relative scaling of the one shown in the episodes, just in scaled down polygon numbers.

when the model is scaled to the 750.5 m given by Eaglemoss... the bridge window is 2.65 m tall.

The only time I have found someone standing in front of the Bridge Window so far is
Lorca in "The Butcher's Knife cares not for the Lamb's cry " and Mudd in "Magic to make the most sane man go mad".

With Rainn Wilson being 1.89 m tall the window appears to be 1/3 to 1/2 Wilsons taller than the actor.
Same with Jason Isaacs and his 1.8 m.

That would mean it is somewhere in the ballpark of
Lorca: 2.34 to 2.70 m
Mudd: 2.45 to 2.83 m

And the Shuttlebay Door measures at 10.8 m on that model with the 750.5 m scaling.

Well... fuck me sideways with a chainsaw .

and for a Sketchup encore:
Discovery Bridge Window with Lorca (left) and Mudd (right, yellow shirt)


Discovery Bridge Window with Measuring Tool


Discovery Shuttle Bay with Measuring Tool



And if the Discovery saucer is scaled down to the same size as the TOS-Constitution saucer...

Bridge Window: 1.491 m height
Shuttle Bay door: 6.063 m height.

I wouldn't touch STO models with a ten-foot pole when it came to scaling. Unless it's like, somehow the exact same CGI model they use on the show, I really wouldn't go by the game. There are wayyyyy too much scaling errors in it. Just my two cents.

Elheru Aran wrote: ↑2018-10-29 06:59pm I wouldn't touch STO models with a ten-foot pole when it came to scaling. Unless it's like, somehow the exact same CGI model they use on the show, I really wouldn't go by the game. There are wayyyyy too much scaling errors in it. Just my two cents.

scaling errors?

Cadet Tilly's and Michael's shared quarters. First thing that got me were the height of the ceilings, it seemed like a lot of wasted space. The set itself looks bigger than the set used for Captain Kirk's quarters on the TOS Enterprise and Burnham's quarters on the Shenzhou.

Darth Lucifer wrote: ↑2018-10-29 08:11pm

Cadet Tilly's and Michael's shared quarters. First thing that got me were the height of the ceilings, it seemed like a lot of wasted space. The set itself looks bigger than the set used for Captain Kirk's quarters on the TOS Enterprise.

The windows on the right half of the image are similar to those on the inner Ring on the rimward side, above the four "shortcut hallways".

The width of the room looks about three times of Burnhams height... or about 4.9 - 5 m.
The length of the room is at least 2 times Burnhams height or about 3.2 - 3.3 m with an additional 1.5 - 2 m for the working area / replicator area and another door to the shower room.

The lower end of the room (lower egde of the dark grey frame element between wall and storage locker) seems to be a bit higher than Burnham is tall... around 1.8 - 2.0 m perhaps.
The other side of the room seems about twice as high as Burnham, so 3.3 m.

Given these... the two crewman bunkroom has around 25 square meters space without the unseen shower room (possibly shared with another two-bunk room?).

And the room is not laid out as I initially thought. It's similar to TNG quarters hugging the hull.

Kirk's quarter on the TOS-Enterprise is roughly 23-24 square meters (with an unseen bath/shower room) but the layout of the room is divided so it appears smaller.

Elheru Aran wrote: ↑2018-10-29 06:59pm I wouldn't touch STO models with a ten-foot pole when it came to scaling. Unless it's like, somehow the exact same CGI model they use on the show, I really wouldn't go by the game. There are wayyyyy too much scaling errors in it. Just my two cents.

It's not the exactly same model (that is too detailed) but Cryptic did have the screen used model given to them by CBS. Also for the Walker and the Sarcophagus-ship

Darth Lucifer wrote: ↑2018-10-29 08:11pm

I can understand the angled wall with the windows. That has to match the ships hull.

What's with the angled wall on the other side of the room ?

Lord Revan wrote: ↑2018-10-29 09:34pm

Elheru Aran wrote: ↑2018-10-29 06:59pm I wouldn't touch STO models with a ten-foot pole when it came to scaling. Unless it's like, somehow the exact same CGI model they use on the show, I really wouldn't go by the game. There are wayyyyy too much scaling errors in it. Just my two cents.

It's not the exactly same model (that is too detailed) but Cryptic did have the screen used model given to them by CBS. Also for the Walker and the Sarcophagus-ship

There's also a good close-up of the Discovery bridge window in "The Butcher's Knife Cares not for the Lamb's cry" that actually fits with the dimensions of the bridge window on the STO model of the Discovery.

I'm going to spoilerize the following images for those who haven't seen the Short Treks episode "Runaway" yet.
Spoiler

tezunegari wrote: ↑2018-10-29 07:54pm

Elheru Aran wrote: ↑2018-10-29 06:59pm I wouldn't touch STO models with a ten-foot pole when it came to scaling. Unless it's like, somehow the exact same CGI model they use on the show, I really wouldn't go by the game. There are wayyyyy too much scaling errors in it. Just my two cents.

scaling errors?

I haven't kept up with the current state of the game, but when I was playing it this summer, it still had the same notorious errors that it's pretty much always had. Extremely massive ship interiors, Galors not being much smaller than a D'deridex, things like that. Just look at the crowd of ships around DS9 sometime, half of them are bigger than they should be (or the other half are smaller).

That said, if they've addressed some of these issues (and it sounds like they may be), then tentatively it may be somewhat safer to use.

I'd google some example photos but I don't have time right now unfortunately.

Elheru Aran wrote: ↑2018-10-30 02:20pm

tezunegari wrote: ↑2018-10-29 07:54pm

Elheru Aran wrote: ↑2018-10-29 06:59pm I wouldn't touch STO models with a ten-foot pole when it came to scaling. Unless it's like, somehow the exact same CGI model they use on the show, I really wouldn't go by the game. There are wayyyyy too much scaling errors in it. Just my two cents.

scaling errors?

I haven't kept up with the current state of the game, but when I was playing it this summer, it still had the same notorious errors that it's pretty much always had. Extremely massive ship interiors, Galors not being much smaller than a D'deridex, things like that. Just look at the crowd of ships around DS9 sometime, half of them are bigger than they should be (or the other half are smaller).

That said, if they've addressed some of these issues (and it sounds like they may be), then tentatively it may be somewhat safer to use.

I'd google some example photos but I don't have time right now unfortunately.

yeah they're working on the scaling issues but slowly and it doesn't help that some of the stuff didn't have consistent scale to begin with. Most new interiors are 150% of the screen used scale (or so they say) to make them look more like they did in the series while not being too big or make them look too small.

Lord Revan wrote: ↑2018-10-30 02:36pm

Elheru Aran wrote: ↑2018-10-30 02:20pm

tezunegari wrote: ↑2018-10-29 07:54pm
scaling errors?

I haven't kept up with the current state of the game, but when I was playing it this summer, it still had the same notorious errors that it's pretty much always had. Extremely massive ship interiors, Galors not being much smaller than a D'deridex, things like that. Just look at the crowd of ships around DS9 sometime, half of them are bigger than they should be (or the other half are smaller).

That said, if they've addressed some of these issues (and it sounds like they may be), then tentatively it may be somewhat safer to use.

I'd google some example photos but I don't have time right now unfortunately.

yeah they're working on the scaling issues but slowly and it doesn't help that some of the stuff didn't have consistent scale to begin with. Most new interiors are 150% of the screen used scale (or so they say) to make them look more like they did in the series while not being too big or make them look too small.

The in-game scaling can be ignored once you have the models in a different program and you can scale them to a known value.

The models used in the game have to have at least similar geometry to look like the TV incarnation they are based on.

tezunegari wrote: ↑2018-10-30 03:01pm

Lord Revan wrote: ↑2018-10-30 02:36pm

Elheru Aran wrote: ↑2018-10-30 02:20pm

I haven't kept up with the current state of the game, but when I was playing it this summer, it still had the same notorious errors that it's pretty much always had. Extremely massive ship interiors, Galors not being much smaller than a D'deridex, things like that. Just look at the crowd of ships around DS9 sometime, half of them are bigger than they should be (or the other half are smaller).

That said, if they've addressed some of these issues (and it sounds like they may be), then tentatively it may be somewhat safer to use.

I'd google some example photos but I don't have time right now unfortunately.

yeah they're working on the scaling issues but slowly and it doesn't help that some of the stuff didn't have consistent scale to begin with. Most new interiors are 150% of the screen used scale (or so they say) to make them look more like they did in the series while not being too big or make them look too small.

The in-game scaling can be ignored once you have the models in a different program and you can scale them to a known value.

The models used in the game have to have at least similar geometry to look like the TV incarnation they are based on.

Fair point; I suppose taken on their own, they're probably OK for exterior shots at least. it's just ridiculous when you have corridors in Voyager that wouldn't look out of place on Earth Spacedock though...

My exposure to Star Trek: Online is limited, but I do seem to remember the corridors and areas such as Main Engineering being much larger than their TV/movie counterparts. They were supposed to fix this issue in subsequent patches or updates, but I haven't seen STO in years. However, the translation to a video game platform demands certain sacrifices I guess. Personally, the difference in scale didn't bother me that much, but I do know that Trekkies in general are particular about accuracy to the real thing. I don't care if it's not canon, I like that you can pick uniforms and ship designs from different eras.

I'm glad they decided to incorporate Disco into the STO universe. I like the uniforms and the ship itself has grown on me, it would be pretty cool to pilot a Crossfield class ship in that game.

Darth Lucifer wrote: ↑2018-10-30 05:56pm My exposure to Star Trek: Online is limited, but I do seem to remember the corridors and areas such as Main Engineering being much larger than their TV/movie counterparts. They were supposed to fix this issue in subsequent patches or updates, but I haven't seen STO in years. However, the translation to a video game platform demands certain sacrifices I guess. Personally, the difference in scale didn't bother me that much, but I do know that Trekkies in general are particular about accuracy to the real thing. I don't care if it's not canon, I like that you can pick uniforms and ship designs from different eras.

I'm glad they decided to incorporate Disco into the STO universe. I like the uniforms and the ship itself has grown on me, it would be pretty cool to pilot a Crossfield class ship in that game.

The bloated scaling of the internals and the scaling of the ships in the game is a result of playability before accuracy.
The Internals are that big to allow better camera movement and positioning.
The ship scaling is most likely for better overall visibility of ships in large groups and/or at distance.

And here some more scaling:
Crossfield - Shepard - Malakowski (first Age of Discovery Player ship)

The Crossfield and Shepard are at their eaglemoss scale.
The Malakowski on the right is scaled to the same Shuttlebay Door size as the Discovery which results in a Bridge Window of 2.2 m.
Crossfield has a 2.65 m Bridge Window and Shepard has a 3.3 m Window slanted at 37° (or 2 m effective height).

The bloated scaling of the internals and the scaling of the ships in the game is a result of playability before accuracy.
The Internals are that big to allow better camera movement and positioning.

Thank you, Tezunigari, you phrased that alot better than I could. When I played the Voyager: Elite Force games, the difference in scaling wasn't as bad because of the first-person POV. But STO has the character visible with a different angle (so you can see your cool @$$ uniforms) and because of that, 100% accurate scaling wouldn't work as well for ease of play.

See, I can't stand third-person view; most all my interactions are in first-person view for that reason. And I couldn't give a shit about the uniforms, I don't think I've ever changed any of my characters' outfits since I built them.

That said I do understand the camera angle thing... I just don't necessarily agree. Let the camera clip through the walls, make the walls semi-transparent or something, whatever. Leave the big expansive third-person viewing angles for ground combat or Spacedock. To me, two-story-tall hallways and bridges the size of a house are pretty SoD-breaking.

But that's me.