Apologies for the slightly bad quality of these - I think these were at the limit of the printing resolution used for the display at the DWE.



EDIT: Multiple images replaced with composite

Excellent! Thanks for sharing!

Incredible! Thank you so much for posting this. I see it has a "Revision 'A'" on it. I wonder what the original plan for this monster was supposed to be. And that little detail showing the limit of the "Christmas tree topper" movement is very interesting. I don't ever remember seeing the spire on it going so far into the upper glass "bell": the very tip of the spire, maybe, but not the whole spire.

Dino.

The phallic nature of this beast has been commented on before and I see that these plans are only emphasizing that. Especially where it says "Detail showing glass elements at IN position". What were they thinking!?

That said, I do have a bit of a penchant for glass items and the elements were really nicely done

Any chance someone could enhance this image? I want to use the image with all of the measurements as a guide for my tardis build.

Quote from: potter2000p on May 12, 2014, 11:54 pm
Any chance someone could enhance this image? I want to use the image with all of the measurements as a guide for my tardis build.

Here's as clear as I was able to make it.

http://quartus.net/nbridges/images/2010-Column-Full-enhanced.jpg

Neal, got a "404 - Page Not Found" error in your link.

Dino.

Try again. Works for me.

Got it that time. The link was a full one this time. The first time I tried it, the link was much shorter - not sure why - but that was definitely the problem. The image is still a bit blurry, but it's a great improvement from the original.

Dino.

Great Thanks!

One thing I noticed when looking over that drawing and comparing it with the photos of the actual set in the Flickr links, there are a few tiny changes between the drawing and the "as-built" prop. Most notable is that "sphere" atop the central column. The drawing has it much larger in diameter than the clear column cover. When you look at the up-close photos of that sphere on the actual prop, the sphere is just a tad larger in diameter than the clear cover, and there is a thick, clear ring inside the top of the column to support the sphere (so the smaller sphere sits atop the column as shown in the drawing). Without that ring at the column top, the smaller sphere would slide into the column's tube so it was sticking out just over half way.

Dino.

Thanks for the initial picture and thanks for the enhancement.  They are both pretty much what I needed.  Quick question/confirmation:  Am I reading it right?  Is the diameter at the base of the column, where it meets the console, 457mm?  That would be, like, 18".  Interesting. 

Here's a "concentrated" image of just the column itself:

At the very top it has those measure lines denoting the outer diameter of the cover, and it reads "0457 TUBE", so considering the lengths used in its 'altitude' measurements (which look like this was assembled from several tube sections breaming the 1000mm mark), I'm going to say that you're right, and that "0457" is 457mm (or 18 inches, since the little pop-up for the measure conversion is showing 17.992 inches; who's going to squabble over that .008-inch? The width of a human hair averages about .007-inch!).

Now if you look at the perforated "Bearing Disc Plan", aside from adjusting (as it says) for variances inside the tube (which indicates that these discs actually touch the tube wall inside), it looks like the discs' overall diameters are "0445" (445mm or about 17.5 inches - 17.52 if you want to get really technical). So that gives the column's cover an overall O.D. of 18", overall I.D. of 17.5", which gives us a tube wall thickness of .25" (or 6.35mm).

Now that's one heck of a column cover!

And I think I posted this somewhere in here someplace, but as we've seen in the series, that moving "up-and-downy" part of the column never got that close to the upper, static "bell" part, even at the zenith of its travel. Looking at some close-ups of the top part of the column, the "rod" extending down from that sphere atop the column, which supports the Bell, is certainly long enough, but that Bell's "neck" isn't near enough as long on the prop as it's shown on the drawing. So my guess is when they made that Bell, they made it with a shorter "neck", which is why the top of the "Christmas Tree topper" (up-and-downy bit) never reaches the Bell.

I hope this helps.

Dino.