I just saw this, and wanted to share the fun ...

Enjoy!

YouTube recommendations must totally have us figured out, because this appeared in my feed last night (Sunday, September 27, 2020).

Thanks for reminding me though - gonna share this with my friends

So cool!

Makes me wonder though how much logical thought went into the scale of some of these things, or whether it was just.. this would be a cool size, let's go with that!

My first thoughts are, what in the world are you filling all that space up with? 🤣

45 minutes ago, CloudyLemonade92 said:

So cool!

Makes me wonder though how much logical thought went into the scale of some of these things, or whether it was just.. this would be a cool size, let's go with that!

My first thoughts are, what in the world are you filling all that space up with? 🤣

I suspect that the scale is pretty much correct. When people put that amount of effort into making things like that, they normally try to get those sort of details right.

2 hours ago, CloudyLemonade92 said:

So cool!

Makes me wonder though how much logical thought went into the scale of some of these things, or whether it was just.. this would be a cool size, let's go with that!

My first thoughts are, what in the world are you filling all that space up with? 🤣

A lot of the time, you know the scale of the thing. In Star Wars, for example (because it's what I pour over and research constantly), most ships have length dimensions at a minimum, and the rest can be extrapolated from there.

As for space, you've got living quarters, troop bays, reactors, gunnery stations, etc. etc. The more crew you have, the more support and infrastructure you need for them. And the Lucrehulk was a cargo carrier.

Star Wars ships are also much more spacious and comfortable than their real-world counterparts, while simultaneously being far larger and less crew intensive. For example, the Nimitz-class has a crew comparable in size to that of a Victory-class Star Destroyer while only being a third of the length.

1 hour ago, P-47 Thunderbolt said:

Star Wars ships are also much more spacious and comfortable than their real-world counterparts, while simultaneously being far larger and less crew intensive. For example, the Nimitz-class has a crew comparable in size to that of a Victory-class Star Destroyer while only being a third of the length.

Here are a couple questions for you or anyone else who knows, since I occasionally get curious but the internet hasn't directed me to details.

First, on a Nimitz, for a complement of 6,000 are we talking 2,000 stations/assignments times three shifts? Something else?

Second, is there a specific listing of what crewmen in sections do, as in, down to the mate? (For example, a battleship turret apparently required almost 100 to operate.) I totally understand and accept (and dig) those numbers but can't visualize what everyone is doing in a mechanized/electronic operation on that kind of scale. And can't seem to find a site that elaborates.

29 minutes ago, wilsch said:

Second, is there a specific listing of what crewmen in sections do, as in, down to the mate? (For example, a battleship turret apparently required almost 100 to operate.) I totally understand and accept (and dig) those numbers but can't visualize what everyone is doing in a mechanized/electronic operation on that kind of scale. And can't seem to find a site that elaborates.

Agree. Call me a narcissist, but I know more about aircraft.

That's something I've wondered about for a while. My guess is that much of that is related to maintenance crews. One of the big operational differences between large aircraft and ships is that aircraft leave their maintenance crew on the ground while a ship has to carry them on board. For a carrier, that means that not only does it need its own maintenance crew, but it needs to carry maintenance crew for the aircraft.

32 minutes ago, wilsch said:

First, on a Nimitz, for a complement of 6,000 are we talking 2,000 stations/assignments times three shifts? Something else?

I believe it's shifts. There are probably some jobs in their that don't operate that way, but it'd be a pretty small number.

On 9/28/2020 at 6:51 PM, wilsch said:

Here are a couple questions for you or anyone else who knows, since I occasionally get curious but the internet hasn't directed me to details.

First, on a Nimitz, for a complement of 6,000 are we talking 2,000 stations/assignments times three shifts? Something else?

Second, is there a specific listing of what crewmen in sections do, as in, down to the mate? (For example, a battleship turret apparently required almost 100 to operate.) I totally understand and accept (and dig) those numbers but can't visualize what everyone is doing in a mechanized/electronic operation on that kind of scale. And can't seem to find a site that elaborates.

This isn't for the Nimitz, but I stumbled over a crew breakdown for the Iowa Battleship. Try https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ehbowen/Iowa_class_battleship_manning . When I found it, I made a spreadsheet with my interpretation of how it translates into Star Wars crew jobs, and modifies based on ship size. The crews actually broke down pretty well.

@Bellona @P-47 Thunderbolt

Oh, I wasn't questioning the video makers about whether the scale was correct, I 100% believe it is.

My question revolved around the original creators of those vessels, when determining the size of the ship, did they logically account for how the inside of the vessels would be filled. Now, after the fact, fans and designers can make sense of it, thats what fans do. But at the beginning, did they have a clue, or was it an afterthought?

9 minutes ago, CloudyLemonade92 said:

My question revolved around the original creators of those vessels, when determining the size of the ship, did they logically account for how the inside of the vessels would be filled. Now, after the fact, fans and designers can make sense of it, thats what fans do. But at the beginning, did they have a clue, or was it an afterthought?

Ah. Probably not...

16 hours ago, CloudyLemonade92 said:

@Bellona @P-47 Thunderbolt

Oh, I wasn't questioning the video makers about whether the scale was correct, I 100% believe it is.

My question revolved around the original creators of those vessels, when determining the size of the ship, did they logically account for how the inside of the vessels would be filled. Now, after the fact, fans and designers can make sense of it, thats what fans do. But at the beginning, did they have a clue, or was it an afterthought?

I'd say, in at least 95% of cases, it's absolutely an after thought.

Rule of cool all the way witt Movie/TV/Video Game Scifi designs.

The only ship I'm aware of where any attempt was made to match the interior sets to the exterior set piece was Serenity in the Firefly series.