Ship of the week: Ambassador

Post by **Teaos** » Fri Dec 21, 2007 2:34 pm

I just watched a clip of the crash on Youtube... there should be no way people survived that. The intertnal dampeners must have done a lot of work.

Sionnach Glic · Post by **Sionnach Glic** » Fri Dec 21, 2007 3:05 pm

Well, they had the active "passenger polarized restraint field," but as an active safety system aboard a GCS it went offline at a completely random interval.

Another ative system?

Post by **Mikey** » Fri Dec 21, 2007 7:28 pm

Actually, Rochey, I just made that up. But the sad fact is, it was an entirely believable piece of GCS tech.

Sionnach Glic · Post by **Sionnach Glic** » Fri Dec 21, 2007 10:53 pm

The fact that I immediately accepted that straight off says a lot about Starfleet's safety record.

Post by **Mikey** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 12:07 am

I am very proud of that one. An interesting fact about the "passenger polarized restraint field" is that even though the generator is located under the bar in Ten Forward, bumping it will cause the warp core to explode.

Sionnach Glic · Post by **Sionnach Glic** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 9:35 am

Now you're thinking like a Starfleet engineer.

kostmayer · Post by **kostmayer** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 3:03 pm

Couldn't they just line the walls with Velcro - I'm sure those jump suits would stick fast to them.

Deepcrush · Post by **Deepcrush** » Sat Dec 22, 2007 4:52 pm

But that would chafe after awhile.

Jordanis · Post by **Jordanis** » Fri Dec 28, 2007 11:52 am

Well, they could pull out the designs for TOS movie bridge chairs, but then you might run a higher likelihood of severe upper-thigh damage. Or other damage, if those things curl around the thigh too far.

Grundig · Post by **Grundig** » Fri Dec 28, 2007 4:53 pm

I know I might be off topic (or on-topic, depending on how you look at it), but regarding the fact that we never see ambassador class ships in the UFP's fleet... could it just be because the effects guys blew up the real E-C model, thinking it was a one-off ship? Or did we see more ambassadors later, just not very often?

Post by **Captain Seafort** » Fri Dec 28, 2007 5:05 pm

We've seen Ambassadors, just not very often - the Nebula seems to be used in situations where you'd expect the Ambassador to show up. The main appearences, apart from YE, have been "Redemption Part 2" and DS9's "Emissary".

Post by **Mikey** » Fri Dec 28, 2007 6:14 pm

Interestingly, the Ambassadors we've since subsequent to YE do have variations in the nacelle placement, et. al. Fanon, DITL, etc., attribute it to a refit; the RL explanation is probably due to something like Hal's theory.

Duskofdead · Post by **Duskofdead** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 8:51 am

Teaos wrote:I think it looks like it was deisgned in a coffie brake by someone who doesnt give a ****.

But as far as balance goes... The name and era lead you to believe is it diplomatic heavy but the fight it put up in yesterdays enterprise is impressive to say the least.

If you tell a guy he has to create a ship that is supposed to be a direct link between the Excelsior and the Galaxy you really don't give him a lot to work with. Instead of blasting it for being ugly I think we should be thankful that they didn't create some super sophisticated looking ship which put it jarringly out of touch with being a stepping stone between the Excelsior and the Galaxy. Good thing the Enterprise creators didn't get to create the Enterprise-C... it would have looked like the Sovereign or something. I think it looked exactly as it "should' have looked for its time and for where it was supposed to fall along the starship evolution chain.

Post by **Mikey** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 12:49 pm

You echo my sentiments, Dusk. The E-C, while perhaps ugly in an absolute aesthetic sense, was "right" in all the areas that the NX was not. It actually fit where it should have in the design lineage from Excelsior to Galaxy.

stitch626 · Post by **stitch626** » Tue Apr 01, 2008 2:05 am

In a way, its beutiful in its uglyness.