Here's some more pictures for you to salivate over, from a contributor who wishes to remain anonymous. However, they did give me a lengthy email summation about the models:
"I’m a starship nut like you guys are! You all did a great job at Ex-Astris-Scientia with the Wolf 359 page. Very impressive work. So now let me tell you about my models for the Deep Space Nine season premiere.
"There were a lot of Reliant, Excelsior, and movie Enterprise kits around, and those were what most people used to build their models. I wanted to be different. I was inspired by the Cheyenne class from the Trek trading cards, so I was originally going to build the same ship for my kitbash. There were a couple of the old 3-Enterprise kits and some of the larger kits with the removable saucer, so I was able to start building the design using the trading card picture as a reference. However, I didn’t have the highlighter pens for the engines or the struts, so I had to improvise with what I had, and I eventually ended up making a different ship. I didn’t really have any specific design in mind; I just made it up as I went along, and I eventually came up with a design I liked. I used some parts from the sub models used on the Ptolemy as sensor pallets like on Voyager, because that’s what they resembled. I used the large bridge, impulse engines and captain’s yacht, drew large windows, and cut out escape pods from sheet styrene to make the ship smaller like the Cheyenne.
"I labeled the ship ‘Tolstoy’ as an in-joke. I thought it would be humorous if one of the ships from “Best of Both Worlds” survived only to end up getting destroyed a second time in DS9. The only ships that were mentioned in the episode were the Tolstoy, Kyushu and Melbourne. Since the Melbourne was destroyed in Emissary, and we already knew what the Kyushu looked like thanks to the pics in the Encyclopedia, I chose the Tolstoy (and ironically, thanks to the Ex-Astris-Scientia site, I found out later that there was no original Tolstoy in the episode ). But no one would have been able to see the ship’s name anyway.
"The second ship was inspired by the old Starfleet Technical Manual from TOS. Basically it’s a Galaxy-style Ptolemy transport. I combined another Enterprise kit with some submarine kits lying around. At first the model was going to have the same configuration as the Ptolemy, but I found that I liked the upside-down orientation better. The engine pylons are the subs’ control towers, and the sub hull is the transport container. I was originally going to glue the stand-alone container you see in the pics to the saucer, but because I had an extra sub with an extra tower, I glued a third warp engine to it, and then glued that sub to the saucer instead. Consider it something like a starliner like in the old manual, that can detach itself from the main ship and fly on its own power if necessary.
"Alas, unfortunately I wasn’t able to finish the models in time for the shot. In retrospect, I probably shouldn’t have taken all the time I did in being meticulous in my designs and painting and labeling the models, since they were only going to be shown in the far background. Or maybe I should have just built one ship instead of two. Most of the models were literally slapped together and painted quickly (or not at all) because there wasn’t a whole lot of time, and even though a bunch of people built kitbashes, I think only one or two of them ever made it to the screen. I was hoping that they might be shown in a later episode, but by the end of the series they were pretty much using only CG models, even for damaged ships."
I have a few more pics of the models, which I'll post later today, but I thought at least these will get some good discussion flowing.
Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :
Thanks a lot for digging up these lost gems of ship kitbashing! It's amazing how there are still new starships to be discovered after all those years.
I just checked in the first scene of "A Time to Stand", and I could swear the Tolstoy can be seen in the background, in the upper left corner. Anyone concur with me? The Tolstoy, canon at last!!!
Also, the Ptolemy is a real classic, it has the potential to become my favorite canon ship design - that is, if we are able to confirm it was on screen somewhere. I think there's hope - a lot is possible on a day like this one. Posted by Starship Freak (Member # 293) on :
Just great models surfacing at last! And I for one think there´s absolutely nothing remotely suspicious about which day they´re seeing the light of day...
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
I can totally see that Tolstoy as being usable for a Rigel -class design. The hanging of the nacelles is much like my own Navajo -class .
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
Something's rotten in the state of Denmark. There's something about these models that seems off, like they couldn't have possibly been made for the show, and are some sort of amateurish piece of fanwank. I want further proof, that its Aprils fool today and that the guy doesn't want to talk makes them look suspect.
Edit: Also why are the nacelle grills and bussard collectors painted? I don't recall that being a common practice on studio models, even unlit ones like the DS9 kitbashes.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
That Tolstoy would be kinda cool if the nacelles swept back- sorta like the New Orleans' do....or just straight out in a "T". What the hell is under that nacelle pylon part though? There's something boxy between the pylon part and the second Galaxy "neck" extending upwards like the Chyenne's does...
Huh. Anyone want an old fashioned Flare Challenge? Take these oddities and make 'em look cool with minor moodification- and someone think up plausible fleet roles/operational descriptions for them....like WTF is that sub part supposed to be?!?
Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
i still think those are fakes, for April Fool's Day, they look too new and painted nothing like the way the offical DS9 kits were painted in house.
that aside, they look... good ideas but need work. the nacelles on the versions where they are close to the ship's hull, should be either placed back more or taller from the hull. also the phaser strips need to be removed from the angles where clearly they would be dangerous to fire from, in terms of nacelle placement (strips either on top of the nacelles or side strips on pylons, which the model pieces already posess)
the pic with the secondary hull on top, makes its blatantly April fool's because the Kelvin was the first cannon or noncannon (that i know of) ship to do that....
Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
Actually, one of Jeffries's original sketches for the 1701 had a secondary hull on top. Was later adapted into fandom as the Declaration class.
Posted by Akula (Member # 319) on :
Man... I don't know on one hand it was April 1st and there for it doesn't meet the smell test.
However, with all the models/artwork that has been found over the past couple of years it wouldn't surprise me either.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Dukhat just said it's a gag....though on him or by him is unclear. Those Cardies are triksy, they is.
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
Whatever, I still want ortho shots. I can work with these.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Well, I have a photograph of the anonymous person who built the models, and it turns out that it was CHARLIE SHEEN!!!
Seriously though, you guys are just too darn smart. I was hoping I'd fool at least one person. I should have posted this at the TrekBBS. Some guy posted about an interview with Damon Lindelof about a new Trek TV series, complete with fake Youtube video link that takes you nowhere. People were buying it left and right
Anyway, here's the skinny: I built the models. Although Adam Buckner's Bradford kitbash is the real deal (and hopefully the Curry as well if Dan ever finds it), I though it'd be funny if I built a fake kitbash for April Fools Day to post along with the Bradford. I actually was going to build another Cheyenne, and I even found some actual marker pens like the original. However, I learned that I couldn't cut sheet styrene for crap, so I couldn't make the pylons.
So I went with what was in the two 3-Enterprise kits I had, but then I accidentally screwed up. I built a ship that looks like the Tolstoy, but with several differences (since I didn't have the large Ent-D kit at the time for the bridge, impulse engines and captain's yacht). I glued the top of the Ent-A saucer to the top of the ship since I had no other bridge to glue to it, and I made photon torpedo cannons out of the halves of the TOS Enterprise secondary hulls, and some pieces from an airplane kit, to give it that "kludge" look like the other DS9 kitbashes had. I screwed up because I bought the wrong spraypaint for it. I bought Testor's Light Gloss Blue, and it made the model this bright shiny blue color, which I really didn't like.
I was toying with the idea that I'd name it one of the conjectural classes, and I originally picked the "Akagi" because I decided it was going to be the Rigel class. I had ordered some name/registry decals for Galaxy and Nebula class ships, and the second thing I learned was how much of a pain in the ass it is to apply water-based decals. But I eventually applied the Akagi's registry and its name (which was horrendously difficult because I had to cut each number and letter separately, and they were ridiculously small to begin with).
And to top it all off, once I was done with the model, I realized that I just didn't like it. I know it was just supposed to be a prank, but I realized that I was starting to enjoy kitbashing, and I found that I didn't want to build a model that was supposed to intentionally look like shit (to mimic the DS9 kitbashes). I decided that I wanted my ship to look like the BoBW kitbashes instead, even if it gave it away that it wasn't a real studio model (and it wasn't my intention to "really" fool you guys anyway). So I decided I was going to start over again and buy some new model kits, even though now April 1st was coming up soon.
More info in my next post...
[ April 03, 2011, 09:50 PM: Message edited by: Dukhat ]
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
So I bought a bunch of models off eBay, and bought paint, glue, styrene, blades and files etc., and went to work on my new model. I had since discovered that I needed Tamiya's Light Ghost Gray for the primer instead of the Testor's Light Gloss Blue.
As I started re-building a new Rigel class model, I also had another idea that was cooking on the back burner. I had always wanted to build a kitbash using a Galaxy saucer and a submarine for the secondary hull. I found a small Typhoon sub kit online for like 6 dollars. I originally wanted the sub to blend into the saucer, but that was just too much work for an amateur like me, so I settled for gluing the sub to the Galaxy neck. I was going to just make it a one-nacelled ship, with the nacelle on top of the conning tower, but I starting thinking about FJ's Ptolemy tug, and got a better idea. I ordered two more sub kits just to get their conning towers for the nacelle pylons (although I did use one sub hull as another transport container as you see in the pics). I experimented with making it look like the original Ptolemy, but as I stated in my faux email, I liked it better upside-down. The top of the Galaxy saucer is now the bottom of the Ptolemy saucer. I cut off the bridge and covered the hole with the bottom of the captain's yacht I used on the Tolstoy. It's basically a big sensor dome since the Ptolemy doesn't have a navigational deflector (I'll post a pic of the underside too). The connecting arms on each side of the sub's front are actually the nacelle pylons from the TOS Enterprise. The registry is one number short from the Yorkshire-class U.S.S. Denver, which was described as a transport ship, so basically this is my version of the Yorkshire class.
More on the Tolstoy tomorrow...
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Your big giveaway in the pics is the quality of the models- they just would not look that shiney and new after more than a decade.
Smart to use a sub model, though it would have worked better as a BOBW fake.
I still say we make something in-universe from there designs...
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Jason, here's some answers to your questions & queries:
quote:That Tolstoy would be kinda cool if the nacelles swept back- sorta like the New Orleans' do....or just straight out in a "T".
Actually, I was inspired by the Intrepid from ENTERPRISE; how the nacelle fronts sit on top of the saucer. Yes, you're right that they partially cover the phaser strip, but when I drew only half the phaser strip on the Akagi, it looked like the ship had a big smiley-face. So I said WTF.
quote:What the hell is under that nacelle pylon part though? There's something boxy between the pylon part and the second Galaxy "neck" extending upwards like the Chyenne's does...
They are actually the three rectangular "plaques" from the 3-Enterprise kit, where the decals for each ship's information goes. I glued them together and painted them black to resemble the original Excelsior's neck. They're there because I needed something to raise the pylons high enough so that the nacelle fronts touched the saucer. If I were more skilled at modelmaking, I would have cut the plaques into triangle-shapes to better match the Enterprise's neck.
quote:Your big giveaway in the pics is the quality of the models- they just would not look that shiney and new after more than a decade.
As I said, it was never really my intention to fool anyone. Plus, after my experience with the Akagi, I didn't want to go out and buy perfectly good model kits just to turn them into ugly out-of-proportion and badly-painted kitbashes just as a joke.
quote:Smart to use a sub model, though it would have worked better as a BOBW fake.
That was exactly what I was going for. Look at the side-by-side picture of the Chekov and the Ahwahnee, and then look at the pic of the Tolstoy and Ptolemy, and you'll see what I was trying to accomplish.
quote:I still say we make something in-universe from there designs...
Well, the Tolstoy was obviously supposed to be the Rigel class, and the Ptolemy was supposed to represent the Yorkshire class.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Yes, but what does that submarine part do exactly? What role do these ships serve in the fleet?
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote:Yes, but what does that submarine part do exactly?
You mean the sub hulls? They are meant to be transport containers, like from the original FJ Ptolemy. I thought it was a nifty idea. You may think otherwise.
quote:What role do these ships serve in the fleet?
The Ptolemy serves the same function as FJ's version: to be a tug or transport vessel. The Tolstoy I envisioned as a small interceptor or border patrol ship. Actually, I was going to originally replace the Ent-D secondary hull with a Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea Flying Sub to make the ship look even smaller (an idea I got from Mike Okuda himself), but I didn't have time to order it before April 1st.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
A flying sub with a bigger (1400th) bridge module would have worked nicely.
I prefer the idea of a transport to a cargo ship for this: by TNG, cargo should be just whatever you feed into the replicator and possibly antimatter. Thta sub partcould be lined with big cruise ship windows and made to look like an old passenger liner.
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
So any new designs on the "official" front?
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote:A flying sub with a bigger (1400th) bridge module would have worked nicely.
Both models already have the 1/1400 bridge module. And I think my next kitbash (once I get some extra spending cash) is going to be a TNG Kelvin, using similar 1/2500 Ent-D saucer bottoms, but with a thicker piece of strip styrene, the Flying Sub for the secondary hull, and a 1/1400 nacelle to match the honking-huge Kelvin nacelle, but in the scale of the Kyushu, so that the ship is really small. Would you know where I could buy an Ent-D bridge module that's even larger than the 1/1400 scale, or would I have to make something myself?
quote:That sub part could be lined with big cruise ship windows and made to look like an old passenger liner.
I can still do that. I only used a magic marker to draw the windows on the saucer
quote:So any new designs on the "official" front?
Dan Curry told me that his model is packed in a box in his storage unit, which he probably won't be getting to until mid-May at the earliest, so we'll all have to be patient about that.
Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
Probably have to build it. I don't think there's a 1/1000 Ent-D (yet).
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
You could always attempt to re-create the Mars Defense Perimiter ship design....I dont think anyone's pulled that off yet.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Meh. That'd be boring to me. I'm much more interested in kitbashing Ent-D parts. The Galaxy class has so many different possibilities and combinations IMHO.
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
You could make a GAL version of that FUCKING HIDEOUSLY AWFUL Mann-class design; just stump the nacelles into the saucer impulse deck notches. What about a blended nacelle design, something akin to Saber, Steamrunner, or Zandura?
Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
fuck's sake What's worse, that's one of the better starship images in comics- most are impossibly lame- often with flames shooting from the ends of nacelles.
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
Lol, I was looking up Star Trek toys on Memory Alpha the other day, and I came across this cheap plastic Excelsior toy from AMT that was labeled NCC-1799.
Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
Not quite the Frankenstein fleet, but John Eaves posted some photos of the K-7 station the other day and in the background you can see a few AMT/ERTL Reliant and Excelsior kits that look like they could've been used in the DS9 fleet shots. I can't make out the registration on the Excelsior, but the Mirandas both have permutations of the Reliant's number.
It's about time he posted more Trek-related stuff. The pinup girls are fine and all, but honestly these days I could care less about them.
I remember these shots from Drexler's blog, although he only had one pic that showed the other Reliant models, and it wasn't clear at all. These are a bit better, but still can't make out the name/reg for the Excelsior, or the names/regs for the Reliants other than 9481 and 41XX (although I'm guessing by how short the names are that they're more permutations of "RELIANT" like "TRIAL" was).
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
I'm guessing the other Reliant model would be either 4186 or 4189. Although 4198 or 4168 are possible as well.
Posted by Starship Freak (Member # 293) on :
In the untitled 11 pic, furthest down next to the maquisshipmodel, what exatcly is that model with the weird nacelles?
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
It's a Vor'Cha. It's upside down. Posted by Johnny (Member # 878) on :
Don't worry, it took me a couple of seconds to figure it out too. Back in the day I would've known instantly, but my fictional starship identification powers are growing weak.
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
I'm pretty sure that Excelsior is NCC-2010.
Posted by Andru (Member # 2145) on :
And NCC-9481 is the USS Latrine, best possible reuse of the Reliant letters
But seriously, to me it looks like a very short name, perhaps 4 or 5 letters.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
(I wonder if that Excelsior is the Kongo that Okuda supposedly mentioned once.)
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Update: I'm still waiting on the Curry kitbash. It's in a box somewhere in Dan Curry's storage unit, waiting to be unearthed. However, he's graciously asked me to keep seding him email reminders every couple of months or so, and I'm a patient guy. I have no doubt that we'll eventually see the model, but it'll be some time.
However, I did find a few more interesting on-topic things in the meantime:
[ June 30, 2011, 03:12 PM: Message edited by: Dukhat ]
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
Chekov - Wreckage, nuff said
Excelsior Study Model - Great! I so do love those study models, it's a shame that were never used for more than space trash in Qualor II. I find it disconcerting to see that this particular model lost its two bottom nacelles, as it was my favorite design of the bunch.
Titan concept art - This seems dubious to me, from its silly name to its sillier design.
Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
well that Chkov pic looks very much like this enough to make me think that pic will we ever see of the actual ship before... being chewed up.... pretty fucking sick when you think about it...
Dukky, was that piece actually filmed?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I really hope they did not chop up the actual Chekov to make that small piece!
That Sternbach spatula has got to be a gag- what possible use would there be in that configuration?
I may be the only person tat loves the Excelsior study models! Thanks for those pics- I needd to get back to modeling and build my own!
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
The piece of Chekov wreckage was Mike Okuda's. I believe the rest of the model was what was filmed, and he kept this piece for himself. Sadly, it's probably all that remains of the model.
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: I may be the only person tat loves the Excelsior study models! Thanks for those pics- I needd to get back to modeling and build my own!
Hey I love them too!
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Yeah, we Flarites loves all the ships...except that new Enterprise abomination!
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: Yeah, we Flarites loves all the ships...except that new Enterprise abomination!
Yeah, I can't think of an Enterprise in recent memory that I actually liked.
1. Enterprise-D - loved it. 2. Enterprise-E - hated it. 3. Enterprise NX-01 - hated it. 4. nuEnterprise - hated it. 5. Enterprise-F (from ST Online) - hate it.
(I did like the Enterprise-J though, but since we never actually saw the exterior of the ship in an episode it doesn't count)
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
"Possible concept art of the Titan from Nemesis, drawn by Rick "Sterngazer" Sternbach (although crudely drawn, I like it better than Sean Torangeau's version)."
OMG! The USS Fly-swatter!
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
"Boldly Flipping Burgers Where No one has Flipped Burgers Before!"
That sketch says something like "Emergency concept shuttle for Nemesis" so I doubt it's supposed to be a starship. Maybe a repair ship with cargo towing capacity under that long neck?
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: "Boldly Flipping Burgers Where No one has Flipped Burgers Before!"
That sketch says something like "Emergency concept shuttle for Nemesis" so I doubt it's supposed to be a starship. Maybe a repair ship with cargo towing capacity under that long neck?
You're seeing the word "shuttle" where it's actually Sternbach's signature. Also, it looks way too big to be a shuttle, not to mention it has a name and registry number on the shovel head...er, saucer section.
Posted by 137th Gebirg (Member # 2692) on :
Hello all - I know this is a pretty old thread, but I wanted to share a couple of schematics I put together for Dukhat's Tolstoy and Ptolemy kitbashes. I hope these designs come close to the spirit in which their source material was built:
Enjoy!
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
Welcome, and thank you for the nice schematics!
Posted by 137th Gebirg (Member # 2692) on :
Thanks very much! Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote:Originally posted by 137th Gebirg: Hello all - I know this is a pretty old thread, but I wanted to share a couple of schematics I put together for Dukhat's Tolstoy and Ptolemy kitbashes. I hope these designs come close to the spirit in which their source material was built:
However, I've made a few small changes since I built those models. For the Ptolemy, I added a secondary hull directly underneath the saucer out of a small Flying Sub model kit from "Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea." The original intent was for the Typhoon sub to be the secondary hull, but it was far too big and long in comparison to the saucer, so that's why I came up with the idea that it was a cargo container instead. (And it's now a detachable one-nacelled Starliner a la Franz Joseph, with windows and an "Astral Queen" decal on the side)
I'm also in the process of building a different version of the Tolstoy, based on a design that Ed Miarecki actually built but didn't use for the BoBW fleet. It was made from two 1/2500 Enterprise-D saucers and necks, with one 1/1400 Enterprise-D nacelle in-between. The Tolstoy I built will be renamed and re-registered with one of the other NCC-5XXXX conjectural class ships, like the Korolev class Goddard or the Chimera class Portland.
If you want any reference photos or schematics, let me know and I'll post them.
Posted by 137th Gebirg (Member # 2692) on :
^^^ Please do, and thanks very much - always nice to know I was able to make them as close as possible to the original intent of the design.
I can make a new schematic for the Ptolemy and make it an "upgrade". As for the other one, are you referring to this? It was a schematic made by someone named "Trebuche" called the Cerebus. Didn't know it originally came from Miarecki, though. Good to know, and thanks again!
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
^Yep, that's the one. Here's the story behind it (or as best as I can recall):
Back when we were doing the Wolf 359 research, one of the contributors was a guy named Markus Nee. He and Miarecki attended the same model-building club, and he actually saw the BoBW kitbashes first-hand. He told us that he also saw a half-completed model which consisted of "two Galaxy saucers with nacelles in between...sort of the Starfleet version of the Romulan Warbird" (paraphrasing here). He wasn't real specific with the details though, so I assumed the ship was built from two 1/1400 saucers and two 1/1400 nacelles on either side between the two. Because of the unfinished nature of the model, Markus didn't think it was used in the episode, which was confirmed by Okuda who stated that Ed only gave him the five models we know of.
Later on, apparently this Trebuche person did find out from Markus that the model was in fact built from two smaller 1/2500 saucers and only one 1/1400 nacelle attached to each of the saucer necks. I'm assuming that it also has at least one 1/1400 bridge module as well, because if it was scaled to the saucers, then that nacelle would be absolutely enormous. I have all the parts to build it, but between some other model projects and life in general, I probably won't be getting to it anytime soon. Since this design did originate with Miarecki while my design was strictly made up, I decided that this ship should be the better candidate for the Tolstoy.
Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :
It's been a long time. I am glad that the login data was still stored in the browser.
Anyway, we can see one more ship to the left of the supposed Chekov, which could be the mysterious ship with the two saucers, with only one saucer. Two people independently e-mailed me with this suggestion.
Here is what Andrew McDonald (http://humminganeptune.blogspot.com/) suggested: I was not aware of this model and its tale. I am skeptical, but intrigued. In the final screenshot in your Wolf 359 Overview, the one with the Firebrand but lacking the Constitution hull, there is a far distant object directly below the Melbourne and left of the Chekov that could fit the unfinished Miarecki model mentioned on Flare. It could be the Ahwahnee, but one of the neck/pylons/nacelles assemblies would have to have been removed. This is unlikely, since three of the Ahwahnee's nacelles are clearly visible when the ship is on the viewscreen. However, this enigma could be the unfinished model, lacking one of the neck/saucer assemblies. This would be consistant with the model's reportedly unfinished status.
Alice Orban sketched up the ship and fixed the orientation, so it is now a Galaxy saucer with an inverted neck on top and one nacelle on top.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
^I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but the ship in question is the Ahwahnee. In the screencaps of the actual filmed scene, the (lack of) lighting obscures the lower nacelles, just like the (lack of) lighting obscured the Chekov's secondary hull. However, in the different VFX passes shown in the BoBW BD special features, the lighting is better and I can (somewhat) clearly see the model's lower nacelles. I finally got a BluRay drive and ripped the special features section to an MP4 and made screencaps of the VFX passes, which I'll post ASAP. I'd still be interested in seeing Alice's sketch, though.
Anyway, an observation about the scenes: I've pretty much been able to identify every single ship or piece of debris, save one: the mystery object that appears first above the Kyushu, and then later above the Buran. I speculated not long ago that it was the shuttle Kotoi, but now I'm not so sure. The frustrating thing is that while the VFX passes show almost every ship in good detail (especially the Buran), both this object and the Ahwahnee can hardly be seen at all, so I have no idea what it is save for a dark blurry shape that looks like a flat saucer-like object with two nacelles underneath, like a Miranda. Of course it can't be that since the AMT Reliant model kit didn't come out until years after BoBW. It's also possible that the object is one of the pieces of saucer cut off of another ship. Again, due to the (lack of) lighting, it's just too hard to tell what it is.
Also, I'm also pretty sure that the Melbourne's smaller nacelles are actually on some type of extension at the back of the saucer, and not at the end of the secondary hull (they look like they're much higher above the ship relative to the back of the secondary hull). The shot of the model in "Emissary" also seems to confirm this, and I remember Markus saying that was the case as well. If only that false-color photo of the model was true-color!
[ January 14, 2014, 01:57 AM: Message edited by: Dukhat ]
Posted by 137th Gebirg (Member # 2692) on :
If this pic is of the original (and it appears to be based on the surrounding set decoration), it does appear to show the little engines on an extension behind and slightly above the saucer and not attached to the secondary hull. It also seems to have a full-sized Galaxy secondary hull, as opposed to the more stubby version that other Nebulas use. This schematic from Trebuche seems to accurately show the engine details, sans Galaxy hull. This one from TNG's "Future Imperfect" episode is too vague to tell anything for sure, engines or secondary hull.
Then there's also this odd one from a late-season DS9 episode, which also appears to have a Galaxy-style secondary hull and a different kind of AWAX attachment above it.
I'm guessing that the DS9 model is the same one, just that someone pulled off the smaller engines and added a new kind of rear pod.
Crap! I just realized I'm going to have to make some new schematics to cover these other variants. Sheesh!
Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :
I can't recognize anything but one pylon and nacelle on the ship when I increase the gamma of the available caps. But I will try the extra features.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote:Originally posted by 137th Gebirg: If this pic is of the original (and it appears to be based on the surrounding set decoration), it does appear to show the little engines on an extension behind and slightly above the saucer and not attached to the secondary hull.
That's actually the second of two Melbourne models Miarecki built. It was used for "Future Imperfect" as you noted. AFAIK, the only difference between this model and the one Okuda damaged for BoBW is the placement of the aforementioned smaller nacelles. Like this model, I think the other one had nacelles attached to the rear of the saucer too, just farther back and possibly higher up.
quote:Then there's also this odd one from a late-season DS9 episode, which also appears to have a Galaxy-style secondary hull and a different kind of AWAX attachment above it.
I'm guessing that the DS9 model is the same one, just that someone pulled off the smaller engines and added a new kind of rear pod.
Yeah, it's the same model. Obviously by the time it was being used as set decoration in DS9 someone altered it to look more like the filming model.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Here's one of the screencaps I took:
I know it's still kinda blurry, but I can make out the same nacelles under the saucer of the model in question (or at least I could see it on my large HDTV...)
Here's some of the Buran. Judging from its registry number, the ship was filmed upside down:
Posted by Starship Freak (Member # 293) on :
I´m sorry, caps of a model shoot? Really? Are there more?
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
They're caps I made after ripping the BluRay special features onto my hard drive. I can make more or I can upload the MP4 file somewhere.
Also, I think I've figured out what that mystery object is that I had pointed out earlier. The problem was that I was looking at it the wrong way; I assumed that it was either a Starfleet ship or part of one. But the more I look at it the more it looks like the aft end of an AMT TMP Klingon battlecruiser model, without the "shuttlebay" thingie on top (which would leave a square black hole just like what I see on the top of the object), and facing away from the camera, with just the port nacelle. The battlecruiser model kit would have been readily available at the time. Unfortunately I do not have one myself to replicate the way it's facing the camera or the parts that were (and were not) used.
Posted by Starship Freak (Member # 293) on :
This is just a (generic) piece of debries. I don't think it is an actual piece of a known starship class.
Posted by 137th Gebirg (Member # 2692) on :
Re: The prolific Nebula variants, I've put together some orthos (largely using Trebuche parts and other components) based on the sparse screen caps out there, as well as the stuff that's already been documented on Ex Astris. Here's a preview of what I'm going to be publishing on the SSDB soon:
For the last one, I don't have a clear picture on whether or not it has a standard nebula pod or something different, so I went with the standard one for now. If any other additional source info ever pops up, I will update accordingly.
I think that about covers all the ones that have been identified so far. Enjoy! Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
^Great sketches there! I don't remember seeing the 5-view diagram of the CGI model of the Bonchune before...it's quite different from the physical model.
I will say one thing: I'm still not convinced that the "USS Melbourne at Wolf 359" has its smaller nacelles at the end of the secondary hull. Judging from the angle we see the ship in BoBW, it looks to me that while they are further back than the "Future Imperfect Desk Model's" nacelles, they are also higher up and on some kind of extension piece. That's what I see, anyway.
Posted by 137th Gebirg (Member # 2692) on :
Thanks very much!
The Bonchune came directly from DrexFiles before he sadly took the whole site down. I was fortunate enough to have scoured the whole site for ship images, both CG and original studio filming models before it went away.
Last week, I would have agreed with you re: Melbourne nacelle placement, but then I came across this image of the Melbourne top-side which really seems to show two of the smaller engines, very close together, attached to the tail-end of a Galaxy-style secondary hull. The bottom view shows it to be a Galaxy hull and not the more stubby Nebula hull. These two images, plus this one are what I based the final side view sketch on, for what it's worth. I agree that the source material has never been too terribly clear, but I am about 85% sure of the engine placement on is one for what I have found.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Ok, for some reason I can't post the Memory Alpha link to the Nebula class Melbourne. Just Google it
Anyway, some observations:
1. If you look at the pic of the Melbourne with Sisko on the escape pod, you can see a protuberance sticking out from behind the saucer. That's what I think the small nacelles are attached to (you can see this better in the actual played scene when the ship is is motion). You can see it even better when the Saratoga explodes and there's more light in the scene.
2. The pic of Sisko touching the Melbourne model in his office: It looks like the original small nacelles and pylons are actually still there; there's just some other new piece that's sticking up above them. It looks like the warp grilles and the bussard collectors have been repainted to match the color of the rest of the ship. I don't think there's a new awacs pod there.
Posted by 137th Gebirg (Member # 2692) on :
1. I've mulled over that image you mention and I always seem to have a hard time gauging the spacial orientation of that ship to get a good idea of where those smaller engines are located. I may have to revisit that one later on. With any luck, perhaps one day they will make an HD Blu-Ray set for DS9 - although I suspect there is no guarantee that they'll expend the effort to reproduce every single kitbash ever made for that show. I'm still curious if the remastered BoBW2 will have any of these things. Has anyone seen screen caps of the 359 graveyard yet? It would be a great source of material...
2. Holy crap, I see it now! I found the exact pic you're referring to (and the episode it was in too - "Til Death Do Us Part") and they are definitely the little engines, just like Riker's model, but when the hell is that thing jutting up from between them? It kind of looks like an airfoil or smokestack of some kind. Very odd. I wonder if it's supposed to be something like what was attached to this Voyager concept - an "Absorption Shield Emitter".
Edit - created updated drawing based on that photo. To be honest, I have no idea what that extra thing is between the engines. This is just a best guess until we ever wind up seeing an HD version of that scene.
[ January 27, 2014, 04:15 PM: Message edited by: 137th Gebirg ]
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote:Originally posted by 137th Gebirg:
I'm still curious if the remastered BoBW2 will have any of these things. Has anyone seen screen caps of the 359 graveyard yet? It would be a great source of material...
You did see the BD screencaps I posted in this very same thread, haven't you?
Posted by 137th Gebirg (Member # 2692) on :
I could only find the one from Bernd when he initially announced the new caps on Ex Astris. For some reason it didn't register.
In any case, I did wind up looking at them on TrekCore and it didn't really seem to give much extra definitive insight of where the small engines are located - it's just too far off in the distance. If it's CG, it's probably lower poly and the VFX guys didn't want to make it too obvious.
To date, only this pic seems to give the best view of the top of the original miniature.
It's sad that source material is so sparse on these things... Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
So here's the best, largest image I could create of the Melbourne as seen in Emissary. The port side of the saucer is pointed toward the camera, and the protuberance I'm talking about sticks out at the back of the saucer, in the upper right of the photo. It's also higher up in elevation than if the small nacelles were attached to the end of the secondary hull, which can't even be seen at this angle.
I think that because the nacelles are attached to this protuberance, and the nacelles on said protuberance stick out all the way to where the end of the secondary hull is, that might be why it looks like they're attached to the secondary hull in that false-color top view. I think this is how it actually looks (I used the bottom view because it's a better view):
Posted by 137th Gebirg (Member # 2692) on :
Ah...I see it now...perhaps it's an extension off the rectangular "shuttlebay" module that sits on top of all Nebula secondary hulls? Seems really...I dunno...after-thoughtish. Perhaps my brain didn't want to believe they just tacked something on there off a thin stick, but that does look like what they did.
So something like this, perhaps? Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
While we know it's a kit-bash, was just wondering about possible uses for the other smaller nacelles?
Something to allow the saucer section to travel at warp-speed after separation?
Posted by 137th Gebirg (Member # 2692) on :
I thought about the exact same thing when I was working on these diagrams last week and I've come to that conclusion as well.
They did something like that for the Prometheus in Voyager's "Message in a Bottle". The upper and lower halves of the secondary hull had a pair of large-size engines for each module, but the primary hull had two tiny engines pop out in warp travel, one from the bridge area and one directly beneath on the underside. No doubt to maintain a stable warp field while separation occurs so they don't loose the saucer section in mid-flight.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote:Originally posted by 137th Gebirg: So something like this, perhaps?
Yeah, something like that. Although looking at the ship in both BoBW and Emissary, I'm wondering if the extension is a bit thicker all around than just a thin protuberance. I'm also wondering if the nacelles aren't even higher up (not the pylons, but the extension).
Posted by 137th Gebirg (Member # 2692) on :
If it were attached higher up, it would almost have to be physically attached to the saucer itself instead of the secondary hull in any way. If so, and even if the support platform were thicker, it would be a dangerously vulnerable object that could be easily knocked off, both as a model and in the Trek-verse.
Have you been able to track down the location of the original model made for Wolf 359, per-chance (or the Riker/Sisko desk model as well)? It seems close-ups of these things are popping up all the time - just wondering if anyone asked the owners of the known models (Buckner, Hutzel, Okuda, etc.) if they have them or recall details.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
I'm sure the original models (both the battle-damaged one and the intact one) are long gone. If they were still in Paramount's possession they would have been auctioned off and we'd have heard about it. They're either years-ago garbage or in someone's personal possession.
Adam Buckner had nothing to do with BoBW; he only built kitbashes for DS9. The only four people I can think of who would have any information about the kitbashes are Okuda, Sternbach, Hutzel, and Ed Miarecki. I'm sure there's no more info that Okuda and Sternbach didn't give us back in 2001, and while Miarecki built the models himself, I'm extremely hesitant to contact him considering the debacle that happened last time. Plus, he probably doesn't remember anything anyway.
I would absolutely love to pick Gary Hutzel's brain about this, if it weren't for the fact that I don't have any contact info for him, and I have no idea if he'd even be receptive to chatting. I know Okuda, Sternbach and Drexler have always been great at providing info in the past, but I know nothing about Hutzel.
I would guess that at this point, it's unlikely that new info will be found either in verbal statements or photos, but hey, one never knows. Just the fact that a decade ago, some random guy on the internetz just happened to have photos from Okuda's slideshow says that the truth is still out there...;-)
Posted by 137th Gebirg (Member # 2692) on :
Yeah, it's always good to hope that something new will rise to the surface one day.
Although I am unfamiliar with the Miarecki incident of which you speak.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Back when the big Wolf 359 thread was going on here, one piece of information uncovered was Miarecki's website. Remember, at the time we knew nothing about the kitbashes other than some basic (and erroneous) descriptions of a few of them. We didn't even know who built them until Miarecki listed his five models on his site. He also had a contact email. Unfortunately, as tends to happen when lots of people get the same information at the same time without consulting each other, about 100 people decided to email him asking about the models (what they looked like; does he have photos, etc.) Since his site and contact info was primary for work solicitation, he (rightly) got pissed at all these people emailing him asking the exact same thing, for which he wasn't getting paid for, or could even remember clearly. It was bad and it was ugly, and as a member of the research team, I did NOT want that to happen again with anyone else we contacted. Luckily, our communications with Okuda and Sternbach proved to be much better handled
Later on, once we got more info and pics, one of the other guys emailed him again (just one email this time) and made a collage of the five ships to see if it would jog Miarecki's memory. I seem to recall that it was the false-color top view of the Melbourne, the pic of the Kyushu hanging in the Art Department, the well-known trading card pic of the Ahwahnee, and the pic of the Chekov sitting on the coffee cup (he did send the wrong pic of the Buran, as we didn't have the slideshow photo yet and still thought it was the erroneous Constitution-based design; rightly Miarecki didn't recognize it). He was friendlier this time and did recall building the other models.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote:Originally posted by 137th Gebirg:
2. Holy crap, I see it now! I found the exact pic you're referring to (and the episode it was in too - "Til Death Do Us Part") and they are definitely the little engines, just like Riker's model, but when the hell is that thing jutting up from between them? It kind of looks like an airfoil or smokestack of some kind. Very odd. I wonder if it's supposed to be something like what was attached to this Voyager concept - an "Absorption Shield Emitter".
Edit - created updated drawing based on that photo. To be honest, I have no idea what that extra thing is between the engines. This is just a best guess until we ever wind up seeing an HD version of that scene.
Turns out the Melbourne really gets around...it was set decoration in Ben Maxwell's ready room on the Phoenix, and here we can see it a bit better:
Looks like that mystery piece is a part that attaches across both small nacelles and has the "bump" in between, kinda like the Reliant's torpedo pod and struts. It also looks like the bussards and warp grilles of the small nacelles were painted the same color as the nacelles themselves as early as "The Wounded," so maybe they're not meant to be nacelles anymore. One thing's for certain...it's not a pod like the later Nebulas have, as the desk model was modified before the studio model even got that type of pod.
Posted by Guardian 2000 (Member # 743) on :
It's a 24th Century catcher's mitt for whatever falls out of the saucer shuttlebay.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
). But no one would have been able to see the ship’s name anyway.![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
