posted
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.
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
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.
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?
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
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...
Registered: Sep 2013
| IP: Logged
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):
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
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?
Registered: Sep 2013
| IP: Logged
posted
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.
Registered: Sep 2013
| IP: Logged
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).
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
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.
Registered: Sep 2013
| IP: Logged
posted
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...;-)
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
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.
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
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.
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
