FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Profile Log in to check your private messages
 Forum Index      Log in  Register
Design Thread: Nostromo interiors and deck configurations
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 24, 25, 26  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic     Forum Index -> General Discussion related to Alien
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Vader
Community Member


Joined: 19 Feb 2011
Posts: 249
Location: Sweden

PostPosted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

joberg wrote:
All this makes for an interesting read; thanks Vader for that. Cool

We aim to please!
_________________
26354
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Author Message
FenGiddel
Community Member


Joined: 11 Jul 2009
Posts: 343

PostPosted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 5:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Aye, Vader.

The interaction of all the ship's drives would be a complex dance with.MU-TH-UR guiding all?

And let me point out. Dallas' command as they near the surface to. (and I paraphrase) "shut down drive engines". Then we see a shot of the ship, the I sound of engines revving up,possibly the lifter quads?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Author Message
Vader
Community Member


Joined: 19 Feb 2011
Posts: 249
Location: Sweden

PostPosted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just jotting down some stuff that has been running through my head today — I'm sure you already know this and take it for granted, but I thought it might be useful to write it down anyway:


The "deck plans" for the studio sets (I think I identified three different layouts in the archive I linked to earlier) place compartments in what basically amounts to random locations. The only purpose of the sets is to provide a convenient environment to shoot scenes in, not to accurately represent a ship's internal layout.
Examples of obvious discrepancies are how the shuttle is placed in the same relative location as the bridge, or how the hypersleep chamber is placed in the "B/C deck" set when it would seem more logical for it to be on A deck, or how the engineering control room set faces into the rest of the crew habitat when it obviously must face outward from it.

A consequence of this is that the set drawings are almost useless when it comes to determining the layout of the ship. Indeed, even the shape of certain compartments is questionable as they are represented in the sets — see for instance the relative positions of the bridge observation blisters as seen on the model and as seen in the set drawings.


Instead, we have three other resources available, in order of precedence:

Primary: SJ's external blueprints.
This must be the template that everything else has to fit into. These blueprints lock the location and shape of all features and compartments that appear both on the external blueprints and the internal layout: the aforementioned bridge, the shuttle, various air locks, the landing gear wells, Ash's observation blister, the balancing considerations from the previous page, the volume available, and so on, and so forth.

Secondary: The movie itself.
We can use the movie to trace the path of each tracking and/or panning shot in the set drawings, to get an idea of how any compartments seen in that specific shot only may relate to one another.
However, the drawings should not be taken provide any information as to how the compartments seen in that shot relate to compartments in another shot, even if the other shot tracks through some of the same spaces (unless it's some absolutely unique space, such as the bridge or galley).

Tertiary: Our own common sense.
Everything not given by the above, from the interrelationships of each of the jigsaw puzzle pieces garnered through the above two methods, to all of the features and compartments that we can infer must exist somewhere, but are never seen in the movie (the crew must have other bunks than the hypersleep pods; likewise, there must be heads here and there. And so on), is up to us to figure out.


Sound about right to you fellows?
_________________
26354
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Author Message
FenGiddel
Community Member


Joined: 11 Jul 2009
Posts: 343

PostPosted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 8:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Sound about right to you fellows?


Got my vote! I agree especially with the assumption that the set plans are more for filming than depicting actuality. That's one reason why I had some goofy looking corridors in my deck plans since I couldn't figure any other way of linking areas together except by loosely following the set design logic. I figured the interior was based on a few ladderwell hubs with other areas branching off from them.

And you're right, the final design needs to fit SJ's exteriors or we're entering Tardis-ville...[/quote]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Author Message
Space Jockey
Community Member


Joined: 13 Apr 2009
Posts: 556
Location: East Tennessee

PostPosted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 9:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well I think you're both spot on with everything said thus far, as brought up in an earlier post with the Deck A set re-vamped to shoot Deck B and C scenes especially and also (I think it was in 'The Book of Alien' where it was said that some walls could be movable to allow for cameras to fit in and film)... ...in alot of respects it's good news for us, as it gives us a little more leeway to design in, faithfully, the missing parts. At least one brief shot from camera point of view going down a corridor toward the end of the movie when Ripley is running to escape is actually mirrored (and I only noticed that by looking at the Semiotic Standard signs near the ceiling).

I'm glad you brought up the viewports/blisters on the bridge, I know Starigger had the same problem when he was making his Bridge SketchUp model. I think thoughout we are going to come across those kinds of instances - after all I'm sure they weren't expecting when making the movie that people like us would look at it all this intensly, but, it's fun.

Another aspect we discovered (actually there were two) was the relationship of the Interior Set of the Undercarraige Room with it's placement of the 'leg', and it's placement on the model. As Brett enters the undercarraige room, one of the 'feet' is on his side of the room, but on the model the landing leg structure is at a 45 degree angle. In this case, a technical reason for it can be dreamt up but in other areas it's a little more tricky.

Brett inside the Undercarriage Room, note the orientation of the leg and the square hatch in the floor



Brian Johnson with the Nostromo model, note the leg orientation



We should probably make a brief list of scenes from the movie where the continuity regarding the set doesn't make sense. That way we can design in explanations for it or ways around it.

1. The scene where Ripley leaves to prep the shuttle and Lambert and Parket go down a ladderwell to C Deck.

This scene because of behind the scene photos and the way it is edited gives us the impression that the ladderwell is directly behind the Narcissus (with a corridor in between) which is impossible, as Lambert and Parker would descend out of the Hull and into space because of the Narcissus' location on the Nostromo. Second, the corridor as the three crewmembers talk about the escape as they walk down the corridor, taking in consideration the orientation of Narcissus, seems to be in a U-shape almost - which would mean the scene begins with the three of them in the Port 'Nacelle' and doesn't make sense as viewed.

2. Ripley climbing down the ladderwell to A Deck to join the crew sitting outside the Infirmary whilst Dallas and Ash are examining Kane - when the Infirmary is already on A Deck.

Existing A Deck blueprints tell us that the Infirmary is on Deck A along with the Hypersleep Chamber, Bridge and Galley - which leaves this scene as a bit of a headscratcher. Maybe there is more than one level to A Deck - or the Infirmary is on B Deck. However the latter is unlikely, as as the crew race to find out where the spilled acid blood is eating through the decks, they decend two decks before the acid's effects fizzle out in the ceiling of a C Deck storage room. Also, beside the set blueprint, the corridor outside the Infirmary as a Design Aesthetic / Character that is found on A Deck - just like the corridors on B and C Decks have their own design identities. Sometimes when viewing behind the scene shots, these identities help us identify which Deck the shot comes from.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Author Message
Space Jockey
Community Member


Joined: 13 Apr 2009
Posts: 556
Location: East Tennessee

PostPosted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 9:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There seems to be four different deck blueprints on the Remington-Rand site - to me three of them are A Deck and one B/C Deck plan where the A Deck plan has been revamped for B and C Deck shooting.

Deck A - General Arrangement Plan





Deck A - Setting Out Plan (has dimensions)



Deck A - Floor Material / Pattern Layout Plan





Deck B/C (Deck A Revamp) - General Arrangement Plan


_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Author Message
Space Jockey
Community Member


Joined: 13 Apr 2009
Posts: 556
Location: East Tennessee

PostPosted: Fri Jul 15, 2011 9:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm going to re-post these images too.
These are useful for tracing over / scribbling ideas on.
They provide a template - on certain Decks and parts of the ship, they will enable us to design the areas so they fit within the hull.

Imagine if you took a horizontal slice through the hull at A Deck, and you had an image showing you where the Hull is in relation to where you are vertically within the ship. You would get this.



Now, take some horizontal cuts going down vertically through the ship at every 10ft.












Now from the Bridge, going up every 10ft.








A side view with a section cut.





Hope these are useful.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Author Message
FenGiddel
Community Member


Joined: 11 Jul 2009
Posts: 343

PostPosted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 6:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Agreed.

Our only chance at this is to show locations as depicted in the film as much as we can and then put others were they would 'logically' be. The list of 'impossibles' you mention SJ will be helpful. I ran into that trying to figure out how someone would get to the escape shuttles.

We've all heard of "willing suspension of disbelief" in reference to fiction/film/theater...well, we may have to further tweak Nostromo's insides so that they appear as a 'real' ship would even though doing so may contradict on-film 'proof', as in the scenes you discuss that wouldn't seem possible in the 'reality' we're designing.

(I hate using so many apostrophes to qualify my terminology, but hey, this is SF, is it not?)

I think we're on the same page and have some flexible minds with plenty of room for productive discussion.

Cheers![/i]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Author Message
Vader
Community Member


Joined: 19 Feb 2011
Posts: 249
Location: Sweden

PostPosted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 6:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Great info, SJ! Particularly those hull outlines are invaluable!

Just to make it a bit clearer — could you draw lines in a profile view indicating where the outlines go?


Space Jockey wrote:
I'm glad you brought up the viewports/blisters on the bridge, I know Starigger had the same problem when he was making his Bridge SketchUp model. I think thoughout we are going to come across those kinds of instances - after all I'm sure they weren't expecting when making the movie that people like us would look at it all this intensly, but, it's fun.

And it's for the fun we're doing it!

I think that in general, the model, and your blueprints, must take precedence over the sets, simply because the filming messes with perspective in the interiors, and you can't really always tell what's what anyway — does that corridor bend 45°, or is that 60°? And looking at the movie, you can't readily tell that the set's bridge blisters are positioned differently from the model's.


Space Jockey wrote:
Another aspect we discovered (actually there were two) was the relationship of the Interior Set of the Undercarraige Room with it's placement of the 'leg', and it's placement on the model...

Brett inside the Undercarriage Room, note the orientation of the leg and the square hatch in the floor

[image]

Brian Johnson with the Nostromo model, note the leg orientation

[image]

[EDIT: Just ignore what I was saying here before -- I wasn't looking at the imagery correctly]

But as you say, a technical rationale can be invented.


Space Jockey wrote:
1. The scene where Ripley leaves to prep the shuttle and Lambert and Parket go down a ladderwell to C Deck.

The simplest solution is probably to say that the impression given by the editing (behind-the-scenes info, when in conflict with logic, I think we can safely ignore) is erroneous, and that the corridor is in fact just the first leg on the way leading to the shuttle, and may consequently be oriented in some way that has no direct bearing on the orientation of the Narcissus.


Space Jockey wrote:
2. Ripley climbing down the ladderwell to A Deck to join the crew sitting outside the Infirmary whilst Dallas and Ash are examining Kane - when the Infirmary is already on A Deck.

This is a really tricky one.
Is there any provision to say that the Nostromo has more than three decks in the crew habitat? I can't seem to recall off the top of my head exctly what they say about decks in the movie dialogue...
_________________
26354


Last edited by Vader on Tue Jul 19, 2011 7:07 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Author Message
joberg
Community Member


Joined: 06 Oct 2008
Posts: 8731

PostPosted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 8:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It could be possible to rotate the landing gear, once it's out of its "box" to accomodate the geography of the terrain (even the rotation is not enough as shots of one of the pad hits a big rock down on the surface Confused ) if the pads are each fitted with a scanner to detect big obstacles on the surface it would be possible to have an Optimum Landing Sequence (O.L.S.)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Author Message
Space Jockey
Community Member


Joined: 13 Apr 2009
Posts: 556
Location: East Tennessee

PostPosted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 2:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Vader wrote:
Space Jockey wrote:
2. Ripley climbing down the ladderwell to A Deck to join the crew sitting outside the Infirmary whilst Dallas and Ash are examining Kane - when the Infirmary is already on A Deck.

This is a really tricky one.
Is there any provision to say that the Nostromo has more than three decks in the crew habitat? I can't seem to recall off the top of my head exctly what they say about decks in the movie dialogue...


Maybe it's easier to think of the decks as zones or spaces; remember above when I said about the three different aesthetic identities, one for each deck. So you have the A Deck space which because of this one scene, may be more than one level. What could be up there though, I do not know.

As another example where this happens - we regard the lower airlock where the three crew in their EVA Suits leave the Nostromo, and Ash's Observation Blister, as being on C Deck. However, take a look at the section below - because of the angle and shape of the hull, the large room Ash is waiting in before he opens the Inner Airlock Door against Ripley's wishes, along with the associated corridors, cannot fit behind the Airlock location - hence why I went with Fengiddel's idea that the Airlock Chamber could be an elevator traveling at least between the Outer Airlock Door and the C Deck level.

Also - though Ash's blister is on C-Deck, he goes up the stairs to reach the Airlock. This gives me the impression that the main C Deck level is fairly high up in the ship.

Take a look at the section below; Zero is at the Bridge, then each of the horizontal lines are minus 10ft. That is not to say that the decks are at 10ft increments - I really doubt that. I just chose 10ft as that is the typical floor to floor height on many buildings. For instance, B Deck is probably located about 15-18ft below the bridge - and by that I'm going by where the underside of the Nacelle 'wing' and the Narcissus is located.



_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Author Message
FenGiddel
Community Member


Joined: 11 Jul 2009
Posts: 343

PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 12:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks, SJ, for the additional graphics. Helps me get spatially oriented.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Author Message
FenGiddel
Community Member


Joined: 11 Jul 2009
Posts: 343

PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 9:50 pm    Post subject: Project List Reply with quote

Guys, please take a moment and eyeball this project list for usefulness? No ego involved, so comments are welcomed.

http://propsummit.com/upload/656/nostromo_interiors_-_design_project.pdf

My plan is to update it as we go along, so there'll be a one-stop for the basic through-line discussions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Author Message
Space Jockey
Community Member


Joined: 13 Apr 2009
Posts: 556
Location: East Tennessee

PostPosted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 11:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is cool, I really like it and it will be useful.
I like the fact that I can print it out as a resource when sketching i.e. the list of rooms / compartments rather than going back and forth to a computer.
Nice work.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Author Message
8th_Passenger
Community Member


Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 410
Location: Hertfordshire, UK

PostPosted: Mon Jul 18, 2011 4:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just got up to speed with is thread. Some interesting ideas floating about.

Here are some of my thoughts. 

 I have to say I never imagined the NOSTROMO travelling at light speed. Maybe just below it. Not that I'm against the idea. I just feel no one ever mentioned it and I like the idea of the slow long journey though space. It has that NASA feel. Lightspeed to me puts it into the Star Wars space fantasy genre.

I like joberg's idea the the landing gear could rotate  when deployed. I was thinking this could be a solution whilst reading the thread. 

I was just thinking we need to keep in mind the modular concept of the NOSTROMO's interior. So thinking about the set re-dress  idea there is  no reason the Autodoc and Engine Room could  not be the same core module. 

Also along with all the problems of geography not working out there is also the repainting of sets to make them look different and represent a different part of the NOSTROMO for the end of the movie. Again that modular feel.

I think a good place to start is to block in what we know even if it means it's sticking out of the hull or overlapping.

I always saw the blister as an extension of B-Deck. Just because the technology is less exposed. So the steps go from the blister, which is on the bottom of the ship, through C-Deck and up to B-Deck coming out at the main airlock perhaps. 

What could be above A-Deck is interesting along with a possible bathroom area off the hypersleep.
If the crew were awake for a  few days would they sleep in the hypersleep vault or would they have their own bunks/cots area to crash.  Maybe this area could be above A-Deck. Accessed from the ladderwel near to the Autodock.

I'm liking space jockey's  sectional plan and elevation templates and FenGiddel86's reference pages.

 It's interesting that there is only 50 foot between the bridge floor and the bottom of the bridge module. We must not forget about the ducting/air shafts between decks. Even less room now!

Colin


 
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Author Message
Vader
Community Member


Joined: 19 Feb 2011
Posts: 249
Location: Sweden

PostPosted: Mon Jul 18, 2011 6:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Great resource, FenGiddel -- it'll be very helpful!

Things that I've reflected upon when reading it:


Compartments:

2.3.1 - landing gear well - as we know, this space and its auxiliaries (the mechanism to actuate and lock the landing gear, and then to connect it to the structural members of the ship) must reach pretty much through all decks. It seems however that only C-Deck has direct access to this volume. But there must be maintenance access points in other locations as well, I am sure, albeit not as easily accessible.

3.1 - docking airlock - possible, but not necessary. The ship might actually be built to have primary ingress/egress in a landed state. Spaceside personnel and goods transfer may be all done with small craft, that may be able to interface with the secondary airlock.

3.2 - vertical transport - would be convenient, but thinking of how real world ships look -- where you may easily find twelve or twenty decks of ship with nothing but ladders to take you from one to the next -- I would actually assume there isn't any. Unless we count points where you may manually remove decking and overhead to open up a larger shaft between decks to winch bulkier stuff through.

3.3 - science lab - Ash seems to do all of his scientific work, analysis of the facehugger and whatnot, in the infirmary. I have always assumed that this doubles as science lab (just as the Science Officer for obvious reasons must double as the ship's medic). Policy notwithstanding, it only makes sense for a commercial vehicle to devote so much space and resources to what remain secondary functions...

3.12 - actual cargo bays - not sure you'd actually find any of these. The refinery is the cargo.
Real-world oceangoing tugs that tow barges intercontinental distances -- up to and including weird ships like the semi-submersibles -- don't have cargo bays. The payload is what the vessel is built and optimised to carry, and that is all the payload there is.

3.13 - ladderway - could you elaborate on this a bit?

In general terms, I feel the deck terminology is only relevant to the crew habitat portion of the ship -- the "gondola", in Zeppelin terms. The larger part -- the "envelope" -- containing all the major engineering systems and the "tow rig"; i.e. hyperspace engine, thruster systems, fuel, antigrav unit, main power plant, etc; are all in unpressurised volumes outside the crew habitat (albeit accessible at points from it), and hence do not belong to any particular deck.


Sources:

4.1 - just to underscore the point I was making: I believe we must be careful never to fall for the temptation to mistake the set drawings for "deck plans". Outside of what we see in any given shot or scene, we must assume the set drawings to give us no information at all as to the interrelationship between compartments -- up to and including which deck they actually go on.

I am completely in agreement with Graham regarding the aesthetic identities of different decks, and that what is referred to as one "deck" may well consist of several platforms -- in effect, there may be "decks" between decks.
It may however be that the different "looks and feels" follow utility rather than actual deck number, and that you may therefore be able to find areas on one with a certain character that is primarily associated with another deck, simply because that particular space sees a different use than the main portion of that deck.
Imagine for instance a little used service corridor running from somewhere on A Deck to an air lock into to the hyperspace generator space. Such a corridor would probably look more like something on B Deck than the rest of A Deck.
I seem to recall that there actually are shots in the movie where we see intersections where corridors of distinctly different character meet, on the same deck.

When drafting space ship designs, I usually assume a minimum of 6m elevation from deck to deck, not least to allow space for between-deck platforms where necessary. This might perhaps seem a useful design rule to adopt here?


Discrepancies:

5.5 - The fact that all three landing gear have the exact same, neat 45° "X" orientation when extended suggests to me that this rotation has something to do with how the extension mechanism is articulated, rather than an individual ability of each leg to adapt to the terrain underneath it.

5.6 - might be solvable by assuming that he intersection is merely on the way to the Narcissus, not right by the Narcissus.

5.7 - might be solvable by assuming between-deck platforms, as per the above; either by assuming that the infirmary itself is located on a secondary platform auxiliary to A Deck, or by placing the infirmary on B-Deck, and letting the crew pass such a secondary platform while chasing the acid. Or a combination of both.

5.8 - still a tricky one. The idea of using an elevator to access an elevator ... disturbs my sense of symmetry. Especially in a ship where they don't seem to be particularly liberal with elevators to begin with. I see the necessity of the compromise, though.



Welcome to the discussion, Colin! Just to address some of your points when my fingers already are up to speed typing:

Accelerating a mass like the combined bulk of the Nostromo and the refinery to velocities close enough to light speed to be of any use (i.e. keep travel times in years and decades, not centuries) -- particularly using a tow vehicle as relatively tiny as the Nostromo is to the refinery -- is a problem that would require technology about as fantastic as hyperspace travel, so we might as well go with the hyperspace option.
That also has the added benefit of us not having to disregard Ripley's promise to her daughter to attend her eleventh birthday from the Director's Cut of Aliens...

Corridors, intersections, and compartments are by necessity modular in a design such as this -- they are on present day oceangoing ships, too. That two compartments of the same shape and dimensions would use the same wall modules is very likely. However, bearing in mind that the far wall of the engineering control room is just a major, airtight bulkhead with viewports in it, and the far "wall" of the infirmary isn't really a wall at all but the autodoc, the "modularity" of the design must be very flexible indeed.
Again, we need to be careful not to confuse the modularity of the set design, dictated by production practicality, with real ship design.

Bearing in mind that what we do know at this time is only a jigsaw of bits and pieces, with no real connecting structure (again, not to confuse the set designs for actual deck plans), I don't think there's any real need to have anything stick out or overlap. There should be plenty of space for everything, even with the design rules we've established so far.
_________________
26354
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Author Message
joberg
Community Member


Joined: 06 Oct 2008
Posts: 8731

PostPosted: Mon Jul 18, 2011 7:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Excellent work and discussion you guys Cool . Yes, if the 45 X configuration for the landing gear is something set, than the square config into the Nostromo's belly would make sense: no need to over-think that one.
Module, module, module: logical (not only at sea as Vader has demonstrated, but also in space: in case of emergency the module can be sealed off).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Author Message
FenGiddel
Community Member


Joined: 11 Jul 2009
Posts: 343

PostPosted: Sun Jul 24, 2011 9:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've posted an updated Worksheet at an off-site server. You should be able to access it here.

I'll aim to put updates in bold type.

I think the numbering format will make it easier to refer to specific items.

Helpful suggestions always welcome.


Last edited by FenGiddel on Mon Dec 26, 2016 5:27 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Author Message
Vader
Community Member


Joined: 19 Feb 2011
Posts: 249
Location: Sweden

PostPosted: Mon Jul 25, 2011 5:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Brilliant update, Fen!

A few reflections:

3.3.1 - I don't remember the sequence of events exactly -- do we know for certain that the compartment Ripley ends up in actually is the forward landing gear bay? As opposed to, e.g., the starboard landing gear bay, which would be located closer to the Narcissus?

3.3.5.1 and 3.3.5.3 - the "engine room" and "machine room" on a ship are the same thing. The "engines" in this case would be the thrusters (as the hyperspace engine has its own listing [4.4]), and any compartments associated with these would perforce be right by the exterior thruster nozzles.

4 - could you run us through the structure of this chapter, please?
Right now, I'm reading it like the fuel tanks (4.3.5) are somehow subordinate to the science labs (4.3), or the planetary vehicle egress point (4.4.2) is part of the hyperspace generator compartment (4.4), and I am sure this is not the intent.

Speaking of 4.4.2 -- the more I think about this, the more I am convinced that this is done vertically, by winching the vehicles to the ground through the bottom of the hull.
Now, there are several ways to do this of course; some kind of a vertical airlock, like the one in Aliens that the Alien Queen is dumped out through, perhaps being the first to suggest itself ... but I think we may be "crossing the river for water" here, to quote a Swedish proverb.
The egress point has been staring us in the face all the time: the forward landing gear well! That's why C-deck has a huge access port into the gear well, and that's why there's a forest of chains there. When landed and with the bay doors open, you have direct access from C-Deck to the ground, using the chains for winching.

4.4.4 - still confused. I mean, we see the ladderways/companionways all over the movie -- these are the ladders the crew uses to travel between decks and platforms.
I'm uncertain how these features belong in the "not identified but assumed" category.

Same goes actually for 4.4, the hyperspace engine compartment. We have seen this space in the material, and we know how it relates to at least one other compartment, the engineering control room. Even though the compartment doesn't belong to any particular deck, we have identified it.

One compartment that we may infer however, but are not able to identify in the material, is the main powerplant.

6.8 - Not sure we're talking about the same Cobb drawing ... there is one where it is clear that the airlock is meant to descend all the way to the ground -- in effect, the airlock is the elevator.
But the drawings where he studies the layout of airlock and Ash's blister around the landing gear leg also show a design where the airlock chamber must descend from the hull, as there is clearly no space for an antechamber right by the airlock.
Anyway; I believe the airlock antechamber, and hence the airlock (at least in its raised position), must be as close to the outer hull as possible, i.e. on C-Deck, or a platform of its own below C-Deck. To my mind, it would make little sense from a "design economy" standpoint to build the airlock chamber to travel through half the ship.

This would also make sense for 6.9 - if the lower airlock housing and the observation blister are at the same level, Ash will need to ascend a ladder to get to the antechamber level and the raised airlock chamber. And again, it would not make sense for this ladder to go through several decks.

The whole double elevator thing still bothers me, but I suppose we might be able to invent some rationale for the airlock chamber to make sense to physically travel through the pressure hull during the pressurisation/de-pressurisation cycles...
_________________
26354
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Author Message
Space Jockey
Community Member


Joined: 13 Apr 2009
Posts: 556
Location: East Tennessee

PostPosted: Mon Jul 25, 2011 12:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

My comments are below in cyan.....Fengiddel, thanks for typing this up.

3.3.1 - I don't remember the sequence of events exactly -- do we know for certain that the compartment Ripley ends up in actually is the forward landing gear bay? As opposed to, e.g., the starboard landing gear bay, which would be located closer to the Narcissus?

No, but my feeling is that we should keep it at the front landing leg. In the rush of the final events of the movie - getting from Bridge>Narcissus>Bridge>Store Room>Engine Room>Undercarraige Room>Narcissus etc....etc....
This path needs to be direct as possible. Going out to the Nacelle doesn't make sense to me. And I think the Nacelle will have other machinery etc that will take up space linked to the intakes, exhausts etc.


3.3.5.1 and 3.3.5.3 - the "engine room" and "machine room" on a ship are the same thing. The "engines" in this case would be the thrusters (as the hyperspace engine has its own listing [4.4]), and any compartments associated with these would perforce be right by the exterior thruster nozzles.

4 - could you run us through the structure of this chapter, please?
Right now, I'm reading it like the fuel tanks (4.3.5) are somehow subordinate to the science labs (4.3), or the planetary vehicle egress point (4.4.2) is part of the hyperspace generator compartment (4.4), and I am sure this is not the intent.

Speaking of 4.4.2 -- the more I think about this, the more I am convinced that this is done vertically, by winching the vehicles to the ground through the bottom of the hull.
Now, there are several ways to do this of course; some kind of a vertical airlock, like the one in Aliens that the Alien Queen is dumped out through, perhaps being the first to suggest itself ... but I think we may be "crossing the river for water" here, to quote a Swedish proverb.
The egress point has been staring us in the face all the time: the forward landing gear well! That's why C-deck has a huge access port into the gear well, and that's why there's a forest of chains there. When landed and with the bay doors open, you have direct access from C-Deck to the ground, using the chains for winching.

Agreed with the vertical idea; the winching of larger heavier equipment less so. Platforms that are lowered down from the Garage to me seem more likely...there are also two consoles side by side that could control something in the garage (see below).
Using the chains for lighter stuff, yes; or used for manual closing/opening something if machinery fails.




4.4.4 - still confused. I mean, we see the ladderways/companionways all over the movie -- these are the ladders the crew uses to travel between decks and platforms.
I'm uncertain how these features belong in the "not identified but assumed" category.

I think what Fengiddel is getting at is that we do not know for sure right now - too early - of a) the location of all companionways and b) whether it is the primary means to get from deck to deck. I feel it is, but lets see how the design and spaces develop.

Same goes actually for 4.4, the hyperspace engine compartment. We have seen this space in the material, and we know how it relates to at least one other compartment, the engineering control room. Even though the compartment doesn't belong to any particular deck, we have identified it. Agreed.

One compartment that we may infer however, but are not able to identify in the material, is the main powerplant. We'll need to develop something for that.

6.8 - Not sure we're talking about the same Cobb drawing ... there is one where it is clear that the airlock is meant to descend all the way to the ground -- in effect, the airlock is the elevator.
Could someone please remind me of that drawing? Thanks.

But the drawings where he studies the layout of airlock and Ash's blister around the landing gear leg also show a design where the airlock chamber must descend from the hull, as there is clearly no space for an antechamber right by the airlock.
Anyway; I believe the airlock antechamber, and hence the airlock (at least in its raised position), must be as close to the outer hull as possible, i.e. on C-Deck, or a platform of its own below C-Deck. To my mind, it would make little sense from a "design economy" standpoint to build the airlock chamber to travel through half the ship.
I feel there are other exciting design opportunities here that could be persued before going that route.

This would also make sense for 6.9 - if the lower airlock housing and the observation blister are at the same level, Ash will need to ascend a ladder to get to the antechamber level and the raised airlock chamber. Yes, we see Ash begin to go up it. And again, it would not make sense for this ladder to go through several decks.

The whole double elevator thing still bothers me, but I suppose we might be able to invent some rationale for the airlock chamber to make sense to physically travel through the pressure hull during the pressurisation/de-pressurisation cycles...

Think of a separate room linked to the antechamber where the crew get suited up; equip weapons; gather equipment.
Then on their return, the unsuit, tend to work related injuries, etc.
Imagine a crewmember has messed up his knee outside. Cannot walk. Okay Ash, let's get him onto this platform here...(that looks like the one in the infirmary...)...which moves into this medical dumbwaiter lift, which gets him up to A Deck pronto where we can look at it properly.
Let's develop this more.



_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic     Forum Index -> General Discussion related to Alien All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 24, 25, 26  Next
Page 3 of 26

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
BBTech Template by © 2003-04 MDesign

Problems Registering Contact: help@propsummit.com