| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14363
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
 Posted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 3:00 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Darth_Hilarious wrote: |
Must be talking about the Gym under the fantail on the second deck below the jet engine shop .......................at least that was where the aft gym was on the Indy (CV-62) |
Nope. On the America it was closer to being near Engineering space 2. 4th deck iirc, near some of the stores rooms.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14363
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 3:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mojomoe wrote: | Which brings me to my point about the vestibule docking ports - you see those six hangar-like structures? Three on each side of the bridge. I have two possible jobs for them (whichever one they serve, I assume they're the same as the vestibule ones you mentioned):
* Command sector escape pod hatches. Mass units (100-200 people? 1000?) to quickly evacuate the upper levels.
|
I would lean to either them being mass escape pod areas OR view ports with the 'blast shields' down.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mikael Hasselstein
Line Captain
Joined: 20 Jul 2011
Posts: 810
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 5:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mojomoe wrote: | Docking Vestibules
I think it's likely that they serve a different purpose - as it is, we never saw or heard of anyone entering or exiting a Star Destroyer through any means but the main hangar, so I have doubts about that being a 'true' docking port (but I can be convinced!). |
You're right. I advance it as a speculation only. However, I imagine we never would have heard about the vestibules, as I don't think we've ever heard of a Star Destroyer docking with anything (except the Tantive IV).
Yet, I'd urge you to check this out:
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Type_II_Orbital_Repair_Yard
It looks to me like the spacedock facility does connect to the equatorial regions of an ISD, as seen below:
(Click for larger picture.)
| Mojomoe wrote: | | As far as the Avenger model and Fractalsponge mesh mismatch, my dogmatic approach is that the Fractalsponge mesh is the best available as far as orthographic renders and scale, but the Avenger model is gospel. How's that stand for you? |
I agree.
So, basically, the renders will help us with the shape and size. The Avenger model will help us with the exterior fiddly bits.
| Mojomoe wrote: | | Reactor Diameter - You're probably right. It'll have SOME shielding, but 10m is excessive (although the ISD-II is characterized by its thicker armor, as stated). If we reduce the armor to 5m, we get a reactor diameter of exactly 230m. Thoughts? |
I had mine at 240, but 230 is good.
| Mojomoe wrote: | Funicular strut turbolifts - I was initially resistant to this, but now that I look at it, it really DOES look like its designed that way, isn't it? The only downside is that it is apparently not present in the forward half of the primary hull, at least not as far as we can see. There's nothing wrong with that inherently, it just means the turbolift system wouldn't be as "simple" or straightforward as a grid would have. But your smart idea does have the brilliant side effect of being able to quickly move from the command sector angularly down the hull (over the reactor) to the crewed equatorial trench, which is brilliant. Although at some point that thing's gonna have to rotate 4 degrees  . |
Yes, but that might be a slow rotation in the tube that a passenger wouldn't even notice. Regarding the connection between hangar and bridge - you're right, we don't have evidence for a similar strut going forward. (Absence of evidence is not eveidence of absence though 
| Mojomoe wrote: | | BTW, your feedback on this has been invaluable. In fact, everybody's has! Keep it coming! |
I'm happy to be part of this.
In another game I like to play (Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay), the official game was in and out of print so long that fans at some point took over production of material. The official stuff (esp. 3rd ed., I hear) was particularly substandard. So I'm very much a fan of fan productions, realizing that it can be hit or miss. I'm very enthusiastic with the level of detail we're getting into. As long as we keep it up - and it will be a lot of work - we should produce something really awesome.
--------
| Mojomoe wrote: | | I have a mission to pick up the Ultimate Cross Sections book for some closer inspection of all this good stuff. |
Same here. I just ordered it from Amazon Used ($0.01 + S&H).
| Mojomoe wrote: | | Venator-class cutaway... |
Yes. I wonder if they're making the mistake of drawing the clones too short just to impress.
| Mojomoe wrote: | | Third, re-watched Empire with the wife, and noticed some stuff. First off, they only show an ISD bridge twice, and only once in full. It's hard to tell, but I have my doubts that the oft-reproduced Executor bridge layout is the same as a regular ISD. |
Oh! That's news. Can you do some screen caps?
| Mojomoe wrote: | | Can anyone confirm what an ACTUAL ISD bridge looks like? I'm having trouble with that. The book DID say that, and I'll paraphrase, the reason the Imperial war effort could crank out so many ships was that ALL parts/rooms were standardized. This is more than I'd heard before - effectively, every ship had the same bridge and rooms. It even says that, basically, the Death Star was made out of space ISD bridges and barracks. Sooo... This tells me that all of the rooms I've got in my Death Star Technical Manual from WEG are LITERALLY the same as on an ISD. Good to know! |
Wow, I had that book for many years and never thought of it as useful (it was cheap to come by, though). Now I just have a .pdf copy courtesy of the d6 Holocron. I think we can use a LOT of stuff from this book. e.g. the crew living quarters on pg. 44. I'm not so sure about the round stuff in the mess hall diagram. As big as an ISD is, I'm sure that it's still going to be pretty cramped.
| Mojomoe wrote: | | ...if we're gonna fill this space, we're going to NEED to make some believable s*** up. |
Yes, we always knew that we were going to have to fill in a LOT of blanks. It's good to do a thorough review of what we don't need to fill in, which is what we've been doing.
Regarding the bridge - I'm going to need more convincing. When I see the scenes where the ISDs nearly crash into one another, or when the MF flies at the Avenger's bridge and the crew duck, it looks like the Executor's bridge with a rounded set of viewports - not the flat one.
Check out the images here, and here. Now, the first may not be the Avenger, but it's an ISD (though, possibly an ISD-1, but I'm guessing it is supposed to be the Avenger.)
That said, I think we remain confused about where it's supposed to be on that ship. Your excellent image doesn't really show a place for a rounded bridge the way we see it in the movie. The best that I can do is to suggest that maybe the slight protrusions that you have identified as the auxiliary commands are the real bridge and the flight command bridge, just like on the Venator. The only thing we're missing are the viewports.
| Mojomoe wrote: | Which brings me to my point about the vestibule docking ports - you see those six hangar-like structures? Three on each side of the bridge. I have two possible jobs for them (whichever one they serve, I assume they're the same as the vestibule ones you mentioned):
* Command sector escape pod hatches. Mass units (100-200 people? 1000?) to quickly evacuate the upper levels.
* Liquid stores / solid stores / fuel cell bays. It's possible these are the refilling stations, throughout the ship on the outer hull, for restocking consumables.
Thoughts? |
If the stores are in the bow, then why have the ports in the tower. So, I'm rejecting the idea that they're for consumables. I prefer the idea of the escape pod hatches, unless we can think of something better still.
There's also a discussion about the opening on the underside of the tower's wing. When the MF is sitting on the command tower's backside you can see the portside one with light shining out of it. See below:
(Click for larger picture.)
I realize I've got more questions and negations than actual answers for you, but I think we'll work this out.... eventually.
| Mojomoe wrote: |
* Once I started thinking about the escape pods, ...
...
Or, we just assume that they don't - there are NO Stormtroopers on the bridge or in the command sector, because they never leave the Stormtrooper barracks abaft of the main hangar. |
^This. I imagine that shipboard security is taken care of by naval troopers, rather than by stormtroopers.
Now, why then was stationboard security done by stormtroopers on board the Death Star... I don't know. I hate to say cinematics, because we're trying to reverse engineer it all as if it all makes perfect sense.
| Mojomoe wrote: | | I read something in the Death Star manual that caught my attention - Stormtroopers are neither Army nor Navy, and report only to the Emperor's direct chain of command. And I did notice that you never see them on an ISD or Super ISD bridge... |
Yes, stormtroopers are like the Marines of the Empire. They're a (numerically very small) branch of the military.
My apologies for the heavily quoted response to your posting. It's a habit of mine to help you reference what I'm responding to. (I know some have found this annoying when I've been arguing back and forth with people. At some point, we should probably switch to PM, but right now we're still eliciting people's commentary.
Anyway, I think the Death Star companion is a great find, though I'm a bit skeptical about some of the rounded features, such as the turbolift clusters and mess halls. That's a configuration that there would be plenty of space for on a space station the size of a small moon, but not a Star Destroyer that, despite being big, still has a lot of stuff to fit. However, some things certainly are useable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mojomoe
Commander
Joined: 10 Apr 2010
Posts: 442
Location: Seattle, WA
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 10:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
No no, keep quoting, keep negating! We'll get there.
Although, I have one bit of anecdotal evidence I'd like to share, from that "other" show. There was a well-known fan effort to completely detail the decks of the original Enterprise 1701, that couldn't reconcile certain details on the model - namely the bridge turbolift - with the details of the bridge. Instead of determining that (what was undeniably obvious), the model had a 3mm error on it - they decided the bridge was rotated something like 15 degrees to starboard, to account for the turbo lift not being DIRECTLY behind Captain Kirk's chair. I would LOVE to avoid those kinds of mistakes, which unfortunately made a lot of people reject the excellent blueprints because that one supposition was too aggressively detail-oriented. I'd hate for someone to have to buy into some kind of bizarre model-factoid theory orthodoxy to be able to enjoy these deckplans, which means at times we'll have to fudge things so they're accessible for everybody. And that was on a Star Trek ship - which, from my years of fandom, has a MUCH higher level of analysis going into how it's designs ACTUALLY work than does Wars.
My example is this: watching Empire's special features, they discuss the closeup model of the equatorial trench for the Super Star Destroyer they use when the Falcon flies by and escapes at the end of the film. They just refer to it as a "Star Destroyer detail," confusingly. BUT, watching Jedi, they use the SAME MODEL repeatedly when showing detail on the side of a REGULAR ISD. It's clear they were worried more with getting a good-looking film made, than any sort of specificity.
As evidence I also toss in this pic:
Which is a close up model of an ISD bridge wi detail FAR different from details shown on the larger Avenger ISD model. It clearly shows the bridge in the middle, where we have it, and actually with details much matching the set - but the details everywhere ELSE are wrong. I think this means we get to pick and choose what we like .
EDIT - ah, I suppose I'd been seeing that wrong. No, they only use the Executor trench for the Executer herself, it was just really ambiguous in the movie. BUT, the close up detail of the ISD is still a mismatch in close and long shots, so the argument stands.
Also, stupid question - what code are you using to link the image thumbnail ? I'd love to stop super-sizing the thread. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mojomoe
Commander
Joined: 10 Apr 2010
Posts: 442
Location: Seattle, WA
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 10:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
I also enter into evidence this shot of the ISD II bridge ( full model, not close up), lit. As I'm starting to identify the different shooting models, I'm seeing recognizable details. For example, the bridge close up in the shot I just posted from Jedi is the same model as the one used for the Falcon docking to hide in Empire - note the same (now unlit) hole in the underside of the bridge wing.
Here's that lit bridge section of the full model:
As you can see, the lighting details are CLOSE, but still pretty sketchy as to our deck layout. For example, they often have two decks ( worth of lighting, at least) where I have one, so maybe I should try to resize my deck layouts. On the other hand, old 3PO ain't changin' size on my layout shot, and his ceilings are going to get real short real fast of we're not careful. Always, ALWAYS be thinking of poor 3PO! At some point, we'll just have to call well enough and move on, especially with the detail model being, well... Complete gibberish with our scale.
For completeness, here's a thread about a hypothetical "Tector-class" ISD in Jedi, gleamed from the fact that one of the flyover shots "looked a little weird." Even as a detail-hound, ... I WUT.
http://boards.theforce.net/threads/tector-class-star-destroyer.50015468/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mojomoe
Commander
Joined: 10 Apr 2010
Posts: 442
Location: Seattle, WA
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 11:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Mikael, now that I think about your docking vestibules, it does make more sense on the equatorial trench cutouts. I was thinking in terms of SHIP docking, like you'd load or unload small vessels there. But seeing it docked at a facility, that does make a lot of sense! It raises a few questions:
* are those (vestibule) shapes on the equatorial trench different functions from the ones on the bridge module? Do they have to be the same?
* if they're docking used for personnel, there needs to be a major way to funnel those personnel from the trench to their ultimate destinations. It implies a lot of turbolift/hallway infrastructure there, some sort of major thoroughfare.
* if they're not used for personnel, could that be one way consumables are refilled, or fuel itself? There's currently no way (hatch/port, etc) to get several hundred thousand metric tons of food, fuel, and water into or out of an ISD. We'll need to address it at some point! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14363
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 4:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mikael Hasselstein wrote: | There's also a discussion about the opening on the underside of the tower's wing. When the MF is sitting on the command tower's backside you can see the portside one with light shining out of it. See below:
|
Wasn't that where the trash was dumpped from?
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mojomoe
Commander
Joined: 10 Apr 2010
Posts: 442
Location: Seattle, WA
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 04, 2013 7:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Close - the trash came out from the back of the "neck" section. Perhaps some sort of liquid waste dump, instead of industrial trash? Although, it's pretty obvious the trash that did come out wasn't compacted at all, and it was all fairly large. What if the "cubed" trash comes out of that cubic-shaped hole, and the larger, irregular trash comes out the back? The stuff that's too big to compact?
----
OK, news flash people! We have new required reading. I picked up the Star Wars Worlds Cutaway book, and it has - saints be praised! - a massive cutaway of the Executor bridge module! Which, it CLAIMS, is a standard KDY bridge module, meaning - in theory! - it's the same as our ISD! I need to check some scaling figures, but it sure looks like it's got some key details right. For example, what we're thinking of as escape pod hatches are actually "cosmic ray detectors"...! I think this answers just about everything we'd need, for the bridge module at least. Deck height, equipment locations, etc. Crazy! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mikael Hasselstein
Line Captain
Joined: 20 Jul 2011
Posts: 810
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mojomoe wrote: | | No no, keep quoting, keep negating! We'll get there. |
Will-do!
I certainly take your meaning from the Star Trek example. A good thing is (and also something I applied to my nav computer) is that ultimately, you don't have to please anyone but yourself. Anything you build will have naysayers, and there will be some things you wish you could do differently, but can't.
Regarding that bridge - That's not supposed to be the Executor, but neither is it a standard (I or II) ISD. For starters, compare the size of the MF to the command tower, as opposed to that of the Avenger. Saxton points this out in the Technical Commentaries. Apparently what you pictures was a communications ship, which was larger than an ISD but smaller than the Executor. At the Battle of Endor it was jamming communications, which ceased when it was destroyed. However, it was basically cut during the editing of RotJ.
| Mojomoe wrote: | | Also, stupid question - what code are you using to link the image thumbnail ? I'd love to stop super-sizing the thread. |
I'm actually cheating. I know the code to change the size of an image in .html, but this doesn't work in a forum. So, what I do is link it to the page that I want to show you, but the image I link from is a smaller image somewhere else on the web. What I do is URL to the image I want to show in full and IMG to the thumbnail version.
| Mojomoe wrote: | | garhkal wrote: | | Me wrote: | | There's also a discussion about the opening on the underside of the tower's wing. When the MF is sitting on the command tower's backside you can see the portside one with light shining out of it. |
Wasn't that where the trash was dumpped from?
|
Close - the trash came out from the back of the "neck" section. Perhaps some sort of liquid waste dump, instead of industrial trash? Although, it's pretty obvious the trash that did come out wasn't compacted at all, and it was all fairly large. What if the "cubed" trash comes out of that cubic-shaped hole, and the larger, irregular trash comes out the back? The stuff that's too big to compact? |
I don't think it should logically come from those areas. The command area should have too many things going on to also have a garbage dump section. That said, do we have visual evidence that it's not coming from that hole, but from somewhere further down? I don't have the movie in a format that I can watch right now, but from the screen caps page I don't actually see the waste leaving the Avenger, so it totally could be coming from those openings - my logic above completely aside.
Saxton speculates that it's
A) A TIE/sh shuttle hangar, such as the one Capt. Needa uses to shuttle to the Executor to be executed. Of course, Needa comes out of the shuttle hangar, not out of that hole.
B) They are "cargo transfer function, related to the vertical bulk transit shafts seen inside hangars of the Death Stars."
For my own sake, I don't really like either of these, but I've not (yet) come up with a better idea. If it's a shuttle hangar, then why did Needa take a TIE/sh from the main hangar? He knew what was going to happen and he was prolonging the inevitable by the time it takes to take a turbolift? As to the cargo... I think that that's what the horizontal vestibules are for. But... without other ideas, I'd go with B over A. Non-bulk trash is plausible, I suppose, but it seems too big for that. It just doesn't seem like a good place for an escape pod, because the escape pod would nee to shoot downwards and would impact on the main structure if it went in that direction. Maybe escape pods have thrusters that steer them clear once they've cleared the chute.
Bridge
Back to the question of the bridge. I say we just flub it. We'll pretend that there's no problem with a semi-circular bridge being behind that not-so-circular protrusion in the middle of the command tower. In other words, I'm in agreement with your decked-out image from last night. I also agree with the blast shield
Auxiliaries
Do we want a 'starboard' and 'port' command, or do we want a flight command, which directs all the fighters and shuttles assigned to the ISD on the portside in Venator tradition, but then a ground command center where it says Auxiliary Starboard Command?
Throne Room
That's good too.
Forward-facing ports
I do like these being escape pods for the command staff. I like it much more than fuel ports. So, if escape pods, will they be 'pods' or large shuttles? I think that more than 20 people would invalidate their purpose. In such a situation, people trying to escape are not going to wait for stragglers to fill up empty seats. I would prefer the ports to open up to a battery of escape pods. Of course, one hesitation I have is that there are doors over that port. I don't think that escape pods should have doors in front of them, because those would endanger the escape pod's ability to escape. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mojomoe
Commander
Joined: 10 Apr 2010
Posts: 442
Location: Seattle, WA
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 10:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Really, on that communications ship in Jedi? That's the first I've ever heard of it. Do you have a source for that?
One of the reasons (the primary reason!) I ask, is that I need to pin down how ILM was using that bridge model, and for what. If it represents a different class of ship, we lose some of our direct information. For example, I'd always thought of the Executor bridge module as being much, much larger than an ISDs, but recently I've been rethinking that. My most recent cutaway books say these modules are standard KDY-issue, and all my scale charts point to them being the same size on the Executor and and ISD.
Why does this help us?
This image, from Inside the Worlds of Star Wars:
I SO wish I had a larger one. I suppose I could try to scan the book. But basically, it gives us TONS of info about the internal structure of the SSD, lessons that I'm transcribing now. Some things don't work of course, as with the other cutaway - thes simply not room for some of those structures to interact. Bt it's a great piece of evidence. There's also a slice of about 30 stories of the Death Sar I! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mikael Hasselstein
Line Captain
Joined: 20 Jul 2011
Posts: 810
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 1:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mojomoe wrote: | | Really, on that communications ship in Jedi? That's the first I've ever heard of it. Do you have a source for that? |
It's mentioned in the RotJ novel, and you can read about the Pride of Tarlandia on Wookieepedia.
| Mojomoe wrote: | | One of the reasons (the primary reason!) I ask, is that I need to pin down how ILM was using that bridge model, and for what. If it represents a different class of ship, we lose some of our direct information. For example, I'd always thought of the Executor bridge module as being much, much larger than an ISDs, but recently I've been rethinking that. My most recent cutaway books say these modules are standard KDY-issue, and all my scale charts point to them being the same size on the Executor and and ISD. |
So the Pride did have its own model during the filming, and it's clearly larger than the command tower of the Avenger.
| Mojomoe wrote: | | I SO wish I had a larger one. I suppose I could try to scan the book. |
I will have my own copy soon enough. Well, not soon enough-enough, because I still have to wait on S&H, but I'll still be able to see what you're seeing. If you want to point me to things, just take a close-up picture with your phone or digital camera and post it with an arrow to what you're looking at. Then I'll be able to reference the location in my own copy.
| Mojomoe wrote: | | But basically, it gives us TONS of info about the internal structure of the SSD, lessons that I'm transcribing now. Some things don't work of course, as with the other cutaway - thes simply not room for some of those structures to interact. Bt it's a great piece of evidence. There's also a slice of about 30 stories of the Death Star I! |
I look forward to it. One thing is for certain. There's 'big stuff' inside the command tower, and so it's not all habitable decking with rooms we need to figure out. What we'll have to decide is how well that stuff scales down to the Avenger. We should also figure out what the proportions of the Executor to the Avenger are. The decks would be the same height on both. Once/if we get a higher resolution image of this image (and I have a scanner on my printer if you don't) then we can figure out the proportionality. We should also figure out if the command towers of the Executor and the Pride of Tarlandia are the same size. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mojomoe
Commander
Joined: 10 Apr 2010
Posts: 442
Location: Seattle, WA
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 2:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ok, just a small intermediate update -
As I've started to grid out the ACTUAL work (I'm starting with Deck 6, the Bridge deck), I'm having to make some final calls. I wanted to run some numbers by people.
My current deck height is 3m, with a 1m inter-deck space. I've landed on 3m wide standard hallways, and 5m wide major thoroughfares. Does this strike people as reasonable?
I initially had 2m standard hallways and 4m major hallways, but it was looking just a little too small. Anyone want to weigh in before I get too far down the line?
Also, I amended my plan a bit so now I'm building entirely with vector shapes - which means this thing can be blown up as big as needed! Little more prep work, but worth it I think. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mikael Hasselstein
Line Captain
Joined: 20 Jul 2011
Posts: 810
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 7:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mojomoe wrote: | Ok, just a small intermediate update -
As I've started to grid out the ACTUAL work (I'm starting with Deck 6, the Bridge deck), I'm having to make some final calls. I wanted to run some numbers by people. |
I'm not sure we're there yet, even if I understand your zeal to start mapping out. Regarding the hallway widths, I see a number of different images out there. Of course, many of them are from the Executor, but I think we've already decided on the modularity principle.
I have a set of hallway images that I've captured for a different purpose. I'm not sure how canon all of them are, but there are a number of different types.
I think vector shapes are a great idea. I also have the software for it, but I have to confess that I've never quite figured out how to work it all, despite a few attempts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mojomoe
Commander
Joined: 10 Apr 2010
Posts: 442
Location: Seattle, WA
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| That's understandable; what are you still hoping to pin down before we really get moving? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mikael Hasselstein
Line Captain
Joined: 20 Jul 2011
Posts: 810
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mojomoe wrote: | | That's understandable; what are you still hoping to pin down before we really get moving? |
Three things immediately come to mind:
1) the hall width proportions, that I mentioned,
2) the big stuff that exists within the command towers, as are pointed out in the Executor's cut-out that you posted, and
3) from the 'form follows function' (sort of) principle, a listing of all the things that there need to be rooms for and an allocation of where these need to go.
But if you already have an idea of these things, then I won't object to you pushing forward. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
