1.Nebula/Melbourne: Just as commonly described, except that Miarecki built two near-identical study models, of which one was damaged for the shots and one was used as tabletop decoration in later episodes. So the original might have been nothing but splinters in the episode, instead of barely charred as I thought.
2.Springfield/Chekov: "A scaled-down Galaxy-shaped saucer, and two warp nacelles, one above and the other below the engineering hull". Koenig wanted to have the model as a memento, but it disappeared when on loan for a VFX test shot. Okuda says he thinks he built this one himself.
3.New Orleans/Kyushu: As commonly described
4.Cheyenne/Ahwahnee: As commonly described

Rigel probably wasn't in the show after all, although Freedom might have been.

Also, Okuda says the other four-naceller is one of perhaps three or four Excelsior study models made by Bill George. It's apparently related to the flat two-naceller but is still a separate model.

And in addition to the McQuarrie Phase II ships, the Phase II shuttlecraft maquette was also prepared for photography for "BoBW". It's not known if the shuttle was really shot, though.

Okuda said that the goal of the kitbashing was specifically to create "sister ships" for the Galaxy class, so one would think that as few as possible "out-of-era" designs were created. This casts doubt over the common description of Challenger class. Perhaps the "Challenger" in the pictures is actually a Constellation? Or at the very least, the ship in the pictures is not supposed to be Challenger class USS Buran and does not have a 50000-range registry.

Also, Okuda wasn't quite sure about the specifics of the Chekov, but I certainly wouldn't rule out the two-nacelle configuration. Both Okuda and Miarecki seem to take credit for this ship, but of course the ships must have been joint projects to a great degree. The vertical three-naceller probably isn't the Chekov after all, then. So it might be either the elusive Niagara or the Rigel, or even the Challenger, all of which are left without a matching model in Okuda's commentary.

Bernd: The soliton rider and the ship at Qualor II apparently are reuses of the Mars Perimeter Defence
ships. One can see the "beavertail" central hull very much resembles a Typhoon class SSBN hull, while the nacelles come from Los Angeles class... The craft are recycled "Hunt for the Red October" material! Perhaps this is some sort of a "corvette" design common to an earlier era, now mainly flown automated?

Oh, and BTW, Okuda sends his regards to the intrepid creators of the Wolf 359 page, and tells he liked the page a lot.

That covers all of Okuda's post now, except for a story about Stewart coming to Okuda's room in full Locutus costume to xerox some script pages, just as Okuda was cutting the Melbourne to pieces for shooting. Of course Okuda went "Now look what you have done!"

Timo: It's obviously getting complicated again, just after I thought it was all pretty clear. First of all, Miarecki said he didn't remember the ships he built; we are still waiting for another reply about the specific suggestions I made on my site, but maybe he's a bit tired of our e-mail bombardment.

If Miarecki built two Nebulae, the ship we have commonly identified as Rigel could be the damaged one. Provided that the undamaged Nebula is supposed to be the Melbourne and is in the scene too (off-screen?).

The most important thing to do will be looking for a ship with a vertical nacelle configuration. The Chekov disappeared after BoBW, didn't it?

Interesting that the Soliton Wave Rider could be composed of three submarines. Never thought of that.

I'm glad that Okuda liked the site, it would be even better with some certain slides...

It was also unclear whether both of the Nebula study models were used for filming, or just the damaged one.

I think the ambiguity over Challenger especially is a positive thing, since now we don't have to believe in TNG-registered but TOS-shaped ships any more. And I do agree that the burning saucer taken for Rigel might in fact be a Nebula study model. It could also be any of the other ships, now that we have a reason to believe that Galaxy parts were predominantly used in all of them.

Perhaps the ship identified as Challenger actually is not a Challenger, nor a Constellation - perhaps this is our Chekov?

In the analyses so far, it has been assumed that the ship is being seen from directly above or below. However, if the ship was actually slightly tilted, then a dorsal/ventral nacelle pair would appear as two side-by-side nacelles as seen, with the engineering hull in between. Furthermore, the oval Galaxy saucer would appear round. In the Challenger analysis, we see the upper left part of the saucer less damaged than the rest, and it appears there is a phaser strip there (a feature not part of the Constellation or Constitution saucers, even though Constellation does have a narrower striplike thing on the outer rim).

Problems with this interpretation include the overtly long nacelles (but perhaps a stretched pair was created, as for New Orleans?) and possible other viewing angles that might disprove the "tilt theory". On a plus side, a tilted ship would explain why one nacelle is so much darker than the other. Of course, there is no real continuity in light angles in the debris field, so nothing definite can be said of shadows.

Apparently, none of these study models that were built for the graveyard scenes are anywhere to be found, nor were they ever very detailed in the first place. From the designs I've seen put forth (the ones that use parts from other ship models) I don't like very many of them. They seem sort of clunky and half thought out.

So, since we've never seen any of them up close or in any detail, couldn't we redraw some of them so that the parts they use simply RESEMBLE parts of other ships? Changing some of the lines, layers and other details would certain fit within my level of comfort for sticking to what has appeared on screen. It would also free us from trying to ID specific parts on screen.

Of course, we still have to match the class with the design. But that's a problem I don't know enough about to get involved with...

------------------
"A gathering of Angels appeared above my head. They sang to me this song of hope, and this is what they said..." -Styx

Aban's Illustration www.thespeakeasy.com/alanfore

I doubt the ship we've identified as a Rigel is in fact a Nebula...the body is too small, for one. Again, Okuda has said several different things about these ships in the past, so those slides would be helpful, if he still has them somewhere.

Aban: I think we're more interested in determining what the ships really look like than redrawing them, at least right now.

------------------
Frank's Home Page
"We're going to take a five minute break...we'll be back in twenty minutes." - John Linnell

BTW, happy to hear there might not be Constitution parts used. The guy who wrote the original description of the ships from the slide-show probably guessed half of it.

------------------
-If you ask me, I think continuity is highly overrated...
*Brannon Braga*

I have been blowing up some of my pictures of Wolf 359 and Qualor II, and I agree that the quadnacelled ship is DEFINATELY not a Cheyenne - I have found a Cheyenne though - I'll have to post my blown up picture... and what appears to be the underside of the ship - ok I'm thinking here now that 'scaled down galaxy saucers' are the Cheyenne's the Freedom's and the Niagra's - and if we look at the side views from the Fact files there is that wedged block shaped ??deflector?? coming from the bottom of the saucer section - well I think - from speculation, the 'scaled down saucers' the 'Fact Files' and a blown up picture - that the Cheyenne has that block thing on the underneath of the Saucer - everyone just assumes that it is a symmetrical ship, that top equals bottom - I'm guessing it doesn't...and PLEASE PLEASE can someone ask Okuda or Sternbach or who ever to go and fish out the Cheyenne model and look and describe the underneath - I've been obsessing over these little details about the hidden side of the Cheyenne for nearly a week now (oh and not counting the other years)

We've only ever seen the top of the model from the trading card picture.

Andrew

In fact, I would very much like a ship built like that. It would make for a nice stablemate for the Constellations and Mirandas which did serve on during TNG and even DS9. I just hope this ship is not associated with high registry numbers, like the Challenger class is in the Encyclopedia. There should have been plenty of older ships at Wolf 359 if there were older ships in the DS9 and ST:FC battles.

Now, at least the mysterious three-naceller and the burning saucers look contemporary to the Galaxies, and their registries probably reflect that fact. We know Nebula, Springfield, New Orleans and Freedom were specifically built and registered to be Galaxy stablemates (although we don't yet exactly know what Springfield looked like). And we know that plenty of models were built with "Galaxy features" for the episode, so we can assign the remaining ship names with Galaxy era registries to these models when (if) we see better pictures of them. If we are lucky, the number of free-floating names will match the number of free-floating Galaxy-like designs.

Then we can start playing with what's left over. We can be pretty sure that the following classes were never built as models: Apollo, Wambundu, Surak, Korolev, Merced, Renaissance, Chimera... So we can assign these names to the "leftover" Wolf 359 models once we have all the Galaxy-style models accounted for. The Excelsior study models and the possible "Challenger" ship do deserve actual class names; with the remaining wrecks, like the McQuarrie ships, we could do what Aban suggested and redraw them slightly, to account for some truly obscure class names we are not going to encounter ever again (all except Apollo and Renaissance above are good candidates for this treatment...).

Timo Saloniemi

Oh, oh also, in this picture above - could this be the Chekov? maybe the nacelle to the left of the picture is just free floating junk? and that its a scan effect that makes it look like there is a dark pylon connecting it - the next nacelle to the right could be the single top nacelle - and it would be presumably be matched by the nacelle on the bottom?

Is that an excelsior saucer?

As for the "Niagara" being the "Challenger", when looking at that picture, it would be nearly impossible for that attached nacelle and a free-floating nacelle to be so perfectly lined up. Also, I believe the left nacelle is smaller then the right nacelle, suggesting it is lower on the hull. Also notice those impulse engines on either side of the central nacelle.

Explanation for "Niagara" Fact-Files picture. The model was painted upside down. Now, this reminds me of the Valkyrie incident, where the ship was accidentally labeled on the wrong side. Now, we assume none of the BoBW models remain, therefore, when the artist drew the design for the Fact Files, he was merely going by hear-say or pictures. Therefore, that may explain the large bulge on the bottom of the Niagara picture as being mistake for what appears to be the bridge on this vertical ship. There may be another bulge on the otherside for the bridge. Now, as for the nacelles, the person merely screwed up. He got 2 on top and 1 on bottom, when it should be 1 on top and 2 on bottom.

Also, the Challenger may not be "assigned to a model", because it might have been one of the now 4 Excelsior Study Models.

------------------
"The things hollow--it goes on forever--and--oh my God!--it's full of stars!" -David Bowman's last transmission back to Earth, 2001: A Space Odyssey

A mystery ship-the USS Cousteau. There is a mention of this ship being at the battle of Wolf 359 in Star Trek Communicator. However, there is no way to prove or disprove the existence of this ship. I merely accept for myself that this ship existed in the Star Trek universe and fought in the battle.