66" Enterprise Update

t2sides

Master Member
Hi Everyone,
Posted some pics of this big ship finally coming together. Still have to putty/seam the saucer, and align/glue the engines, but I couldn't resist setting it all up to see this thing all lit up and running.

Also, check out 'Page 4' while there to see some of the detailing on the upper saucer and the 'rust ring'.

http://squaremodels.com/66enterprisepage5.htm
 
Well, there's not a smilie or emoticon to represent my feelings on this.
THE most fantastic ship model I've seen here, or anywhere else, for that matter.

Congratulations.

Howard.
 
It's very well lit and nicely painted and all, BUT...

Something looks off in the proportions of the main hull (saucer) to the secondary hull. The diameter of the saucer looks too narrow and the saucer comes up too short to my eyes. Could it be the photography or something else...? It just doesn't "look right." I've seen tons of pictures of the 11-foot model and every episode of the original Star Trek at least 2-3 times a piece.

Something just seems off to me. It could the angle of the photography and a lighting in the room problem. I'm assuming t2sides accurately scaled down from measurements of the shooting model and didn't just eye-ball the thing from photos and blueprints?
 
The masters for this model were made from Gary Kerr's blueprints which are the most accurate ever created. He measured the actual shooting miniature and researched the heck out of it. If these are not 99% dead on to the 11-foot filming model, then it must be impossible to get right because no one has ever documented that ship more thoroughly than Kerr.

The photos can make a big difference though. First, the original was twice as large so it will not photograph the same way no matter what you do. Second, the series was shot with film cameras and lenses which are totally different from a modern digicam or even a 35mm lens. So even overlaying photos taken from the same angle will not give you a totally accurate comparison. Unfortunately, photos DO lie.

:)
 
Now THAT'S what I'm talkin' about .

Absolutely BEAUTIFUL . :thumbsup

When it comes to a reproduction ship you NEED
to have them BIG . :D

Scotty would be proud Sir. B)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Holy Sh.t... WOW,... :eek

I just gotta know how much something like that costs - just in case Yaknow I win the lottery...

Jedi Dade
 
Thanks everyone, I'm getting into the home stretch. I finished seaming, puttying the saucer edge, so that'll be getting primer, and new paint by this weekend.
Still have to:
Putty/paint the 'neck' where it meets the saucer.
Secure the engines down, putty/paint those seams.
Add the hangar doors
Finish weathering
Finish base w/ Planet

BUT, I'm a helluva lot closer than farther now..

Thanks again. B)
 
thats a fine vessel when are you bringing it out in kit form :)

Originally posted by t2sides@Jul 27 2005, 06:30 PM
Hi Everyone,
Posted some pics of this big ship finally coming together. Still have to putty/seam the saucer, and align/glue the engines, but I couldn't resist setting it all up to see this thing all lit up and running.

Also, check out 'Page 4' while there to see some of the detailing on the upper saucer and the 'rust ring'.

http://squaremodels.com/66enterprisepage5.htm
[snapback]1043672[/snapback]​
 
George C - StarArt is correct, this is a 99% (at least) replica of the original filming miniature, 1/2 scale to that model.
Here are my estimates at measurements:

Model: ~1/172 scale

Dimensions:
5.5 ft. Long
2.5 ft. Wide
1.5 ft. High

If the ship were real:
Approx:
947 ft. Long
417 ft. Wide
237 ft. High

It's definitely the photography and lighting that gives you the impression that it's 'off'. Look at the side profile, and you'll see it's right on, and look at some of the saucer pics in 'page4' and you'll see the saucer is perfect. When I'm done, I'll do a bunch of beauty shots. This baby (the model, not necessarily all my work) is right on to every little detail, trust me.
 
This thread is more than 18 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top