The Newbery Console: Dims and Discussion

[Rassilons Rod]

[fivefingeredstyre]

I wonder what could be hidden behind this door?  

Do tell...

[Other Dave]

I'm DYING in suspense!  When we will see the plans? 

[tony farrell]

Barry is currently doing the renders for the Console (and splendid they're looking too). In the meantime, a last sneak peek!



BTW, "other Dave", I'd very much like to add photos of your excellent Brachacki Console to my 'article' on the Original Tardis Interior (as a kind of proof-of-concept). Would you care to message me? Cheers.

[Rassilons Rod]

It's..... Beautiful.....   

[lespaceplie]

I'm so happy to see these rolling in at last! I'm afraid I'm already going to start scrutinizing details, though, but that's what we're here for - ha ha! Issue #1 is the proportion of the cutoff corners on the belt. There's no way those are square. The proportion is taller than it is wide. #2 There's also a detail about the fit and gap that needs to be addressed where the top of the panels meet the crown (unless this is simply hard to show at the resolution of the drawing). #3 I think the belt looks a little thick as drawn (depth not height). I doubt it's thicker than 25 or 30 mm (1" - 1.25"). Conversely, my version might need to add height to the belt (3" as opposed to 2.5"). This will alter the cutoff corners (larger).

I have an alternate idea about how the crown is constructed (hollow with 6 frame pieces, a ply bottom, a thin ply top and the cap).

I'm not yet 100% on board that this was a metric prop. I don't know for a fact but believe timber in the mid-1970s was still mostly in inches. If it was all plastic and metal, that would be another story. I've been steered wrong by "convenient material dims" before, of course, but the English dims I was arriving at were super simple. So are the metric ones in this case.

[tony farrell]

I'm already going to start scrutinizing details, though, but that's what we're here for Issue #1 is the proportion of the cutoff corners on the belt. There's no way those are square. The proportion is taller than it is wide.

The diagram was intended as a humourous sneak peek in response to "other Dave's" post as to when the Newbery Tardis 'article' would be ready. It was not intended to prompt the start of a debate as to the dimensions of the Newbery Console. Whilst it contains some dimensions, it is by no means the full set and is part of a sequence of diagrams which need to be viewed together. So Gene, I think you're 'slightly jumping the gun'! 

I'm not yet 100% on board that this was a metric prop. I don't know for a fact but believe timber in the mid-1970s was still mostly in inches. If it was all plastic and metal, that would be another story. I've been steered wrong by "convenient material dims" before, of course, but the English dims I was arriving at were super simple. So are the metric ones in this case.

I'm afraid that is factually incorrect. The UK introduced metric standards for sawn and planed timber (lumber) in 1969 under British Standard 4471. This had a two year introductory/transition period and become legally binding in 1971. This British Standard has since been replaced by BS1313-1 (1997 and updated in 2010).

Metrication (in the UK at least) had been 'on the cards' since the early 1960s and was a planned process which was designed to bring Great Britain into line with other European countries. You will find that the BBC was part of that process with that organisation adopting many European Standards (for example PAL 625 line transmission and recording). In addition BBC Television Centre was planned and built using 'metric feet' (300 mm as opposed to imperial feet (304.8 mm)).

Thus, on any studio floor plan which relates to Television Centre, the grid pattern in fact shows metric feet rather than imperial units.(Of course, this didn't apply to older studios such as Lime Grove or Riverside). In addition therefore, any annotations on TV Centre plans which state "feet" should be taken to mean 'metric feet' and not 12 inches! 

T

[lespaceplie]

Consider the gun jumped - ha!

[Rassilons Rod]

Still hanging on waiting for the "----PATION!" moment

[warmcanofcoke]

Nice diagram! I love this is coming together.

[tony farrell]

Hopefully the finished results won't disappoint!

T

[Rassilons Rod]

Hopefully the finished results won't disappoint!

T

Nnnnnnnnnggggggggg 

[tony farrell]

I'm not sure what that means but, does this help?  



T

[Grimusaur]

So, is there any particular reason Newbery went totally metric with his dims (judging by the sneak peeks you've shown us) while Yardley-Jones went back to imperial?

[tony farrell]

Every set plan I've seen from the seventies has been stated in metric figures (presumably to tie into the fact that Television Centre used metric feet).

I can only assume that Thomas Yardley-Jones stated the Tardis (Police Box exterior) in imperial as a personal preference i.e., it was a free-standing unit and therefore wasn't affected by things like the placing of studio sets in relation fixed points such as lighting hoists, fire walk ways, cyclorama rails, etc.

This - for example - is the set plan for the Lunar Prison from "Frontier In Space" and all dimensions are in metric:




T