Bradley Console room Twice upon a Time

[karsthotep]

that would be the better option, considering the set naming convention previously used.

[lorisarvendu]

Alternatively, it could be named after its designers....

As in "NST"? lol

[tony farrell]

Well, here on Tardis Builders, we distinguish between the NSTs (Colin Richmond/Ed Thomas TARDIS, Arwel Jones, etc) so, to name the recreated 1966 Tardis after those involved would be consistent. 

T

[Scarfwearer]

... and very fitting.

[karsthotep]

Yes,   so true,  I think we definitely need to be calling it by its creators name, its the only way to do it justice.

[tony farrell]

Well, these things are always a product of teamwork so, Karsten, creators might be a better term. 

T

[karsthotep]

agreed

[jontennant]

Here is a screencap of the de-mat switch from the Bradley console

Spoiler

[close]

[galacticprobe]

Well, here on Tardis Builders, we distinguish between the NSTs (Colin Richmond/Ed Thomas TARDIS, Arwel Jones, etc) so, to name the recreated 1966 Tardis after those involved would be consistent.  

We also distinguish the Classic TARDIS designers like that as well. To keep things grouped together (and making them easier to find, like Brachacki Orig and Brachacki Altered), since David Bradley now has two TARDIS versions to his name, would it be possible (acceptable?) to name the two versions as "Bradley #1 - <Designer's Name Here>" and "Bradley #2 - <Designer's Name Here>"?

This way we would know who designed the prop, who it was designed for (and when). It makes sense, at least to me, to help keep things grouped together by Designer. It's one of the reasons I still have a problem with the Child Boards of "New series", "Moffat Era", and now "Chibnall Era".

"New Series" covers everything, so why are we breaking things into "Showrunner eras"? Why is there no "Davies Era" instead of just "New Series"? (Remember... the guy that fought like hell to get the show back on TV? Where's that distinction?)

Most of the New Series TARDISes up to now were built around the Colin Richmond-Ed Thomas (Richmond-Thomas) design, so why not just have those Child Boards distinguish that designer? (Richmond-Thomas Orig, for Series 1-4; Richmond-Thomas Refurb #1, for Series 5-6; ~ Refurb #2, for Series 7-9... or 10, since they're all very close; Arwell Jones Orig for the new model debuting in Series 11... and going from there.)

If we're going to distinguish the TARDIS designers as we've done with the Classic Series (Brachacki, Newbery, Yardley-Jones, Hudolin, even "Cushing" - who designed that box anyway?... we should have recognition there as well), then why don't we have the same sort of distinguishing for the New Series TARDIS designers?

Seriously... "New Series" (instead of "Davies Era"?)... "Moffat Era"... "Chibnall Era"? This makes no sense; the showrunners never designed a TARDIS! They may have had input and approved a design, but labeling those Reference Sections like we have is distinguishing the showrunners rather than the actual Designers. (Maybe we should rethink that naming convention in favor of the Designers, and not the showrunners... especially since Davies is blatantly ignored in the convention we're using now. Why not start Series 11 off on the right foot? Call that Reference what it should be: Arwell Jones, not "Chibnall Era".)

On a separate note:

Here is a screencap of the de-mat switch from the Bradley console

How do we know that's what this control is? Where is the reference for this? (The Special has not aired yet, and the teasers-trailers haven't shown enough continuity in scenes to make such a determination.) If that is supposed to be the 1st Doctor's console as used by William Hartnell, then that would not be the Demat Lever as Hartnell never used those small levers for such actions. He always reached for one of the larger levers.

Dino.

[Angelus Lupus]

Not to throw a spanner in the works, vis-a-vis nomenclature... But we have an added quirk/complication with David Bradley and his boxes: This new one will be the first (only?) time he has appeared on Doctor Who portraying The Doctor (with  Tardis). Previously he was in a docu-drama as William Hartnell with a prop. As good as that drama was (not withstanding Mark Gattis and his nepotistic mis-casting of his best friend as Troughton) it isn't in the canon of the series.
So.... um... technically only one of these boxes counts in the lineage of Tardises, and we just have to decide whether we put it in with the NST lot (as it's a post-2005 build), or consider it a classic version played by a different prop (much like we accept Bradley≡Hartnel and not a different Doctor)

[Vale]

How do we know that's what this control is? Where is the reference for this? (The Special has not aired yet, and the teasers-trailers haven't shown enough continuity in scenes to make such a determination.) If that is supposed to be the 1st Doctor's console as used by William Hartnell, then that would not be the Demat Lever as Hartnell never used those small levers for such actions. He always reached for one of the larger levers.

Dino.

This preview clip seems to be continuous footage and certainly gives the impression that "Bernard Wilkie" might well be Gallifreyan for "dematerialisation lever": https://youtu.be/bUU-zgaN358

[fivefingeredstyre]

However that switch is one of the three levers that the third Doctor used as a demat control on the Sharpe console...

Just thought I'd throw that in...

[tony farrell]

Tish, tish Steve - you can't get away with that! 

There was an extra finger-grip dial on the Sharp Console (no 'e' in Sharp  ) which Pertwee (and Delgado) turned first, followed by adjusting the two handle levers followed - finally - by simultaneously operating the three secondary levers in order to initiate the dematerialisation sequence!

T

[fivefingeredstyre]

Bradley moved the other controls off camera... 

Does anyone else remember Issue 79 of DWM? They had a section on the TARDIS controls (as set out in the Hartnell configuration) explaining what they did and how they were supposed to be used.

Proven to be complete tosh, of course, once the VHS and subsequent DVD's came out; however the DWM control sequence all made a sort of logical sense to me.

I've the scans on my hard-drive (I'm sure I cleaned them up as well), if anyone's interested I could always start a thread; however we would need to do something about the file size limit...

[davidnagel]

Does anyone else remember Issue 79 of DWM? They had a section on the TARDIS controls (as set out in the Hartnell configuration) explaining what they did and how they were supposed to be used.

Pretty sure some of these are posted elsewhere in teh forum. But I have some scans somewhere..