Andy Probert releases prelim plans for USS Ambassador kit!

DeletedSeeNoteInProfile · August 8 2007, 06:10 AM

http://www.probertdesigns.com/Folder...sador_Kit.html

As much as I truly respect and admire Probert, I am profoundly saddened that he felt the need (or was directed by the studio?) to incorporate so many questionable design elements from ILM's ghastly USS Excelsior miniature into the NX-10521 and, for that matter, the NCC-1701-D.

TGT

FalTorPan · August 8 2007, 12:44 PM

I'd heard that he was fleshing out both the "Ambassador" and the "vertical Warbird" for upcoming concept kits. Cool stuff.

I always thought Probert's version of the "Ambassador" was the more fun and interesting evolutionary bridge from the pre-Generations Excelsior to the Enterprise-D.

Of course, comparing Probert's design and Sternbach's design is somewhat unfair, since Sternbach's design was hindered by the "ship-of-the-week" restrictions on expense and ease of building a physical filming miniature. The image on Probert's web site shows that the two renderings of Probert's design (profile and perspective) don't quite match up, suggesting that it might have taken considerable refinement to make a working filming miniature from that design.

UPDATE: I was recently told that the saucer of Probert's Ambassador is circular. I look forward to seeing this design in its entirety.

Basill · August 8 2007, 04:04 PM

Oh that is too cool, even if for nothing else, the "what-if" factor. I always thought the nacelle pylons were a bit gangly awkward, but I have always loved that forward end of the secondary hull.

Vance · August 8 2007, 04:12 PM

Hey, I like the design of the Excelsior. I've never understood the religious hatred against it. (I understand not liking it.. but.. it's the fanatacism about it that loses me...)

But, all these years hence, would you REALLY expect them to say 'no no, that really ISN'T what was there, here's an entirely new model instead, so just PRETEND'?

Basill · August 8 2007, 05:14 PM

Vance said:
Hey, I like the design of the Excelsior. I've never understood the religious hatred against it. (I understand not liking it.. but.. it's the fanatacism about it that loses me...)

I actually hated it when I first saw it in TSFS, but I realize now is was the unflattering angles they used in nearly every shot. TVH didn't really help. The first time I saw her in TUC roaring toward the screen I did a complete 180. I've loved her ever since.

David cgc · August 8 2007, 06:21 PM

One of the things I don't like about this version of the ship (and the Enterprise-D) is the forward-swept engine pylons. It makes it look like the ship is dragging the engineering hull. The only ship I think the forward-swept pylons worked on is "Voyager," and that's only because you couldn't see them from the side most of the time.

FalTorPan · August 8 2007, 06:30 PM

On the other hand, with aft-sweeping pylons, one might argue that the ship appears to be dragging its engines.

I'm very interested in seeing how Probert's design becomes realized in three dimensions. I'm particularly interested in (1) how the upper engineering hull and engineering hull shuttlebay look between the warp nacelle pylons, (2) how the lower engineering hull "sweeps into" the warp nacelle pylons, and (3) the plan view of the engineering hull.

I like the saucer, neck, nacelles and forward portion of the engineering hull. It will be interesting to see the "whole" ship, and how much if any refinement to the overall design will be needed to make the whole ship work in 3D.

It would be interesting to see this incarnation of the Enterprise-C in action during the VFX sequences of "Yesterday's Enterprise." It's too bad the bridge can't get a similar makeover unconstrained by being a "ship of the week."

Basill · August 8 2007, 06:52 PM

She looks a little "girthy" in that forward orthographic, but I still like the design very much. And at least its at the same 1:1400 scale as the other designs. Who is he working on this with?

FalTorPan · August 8 2007, 07:01 PM

Probert seems to be working with the people of Federation Models, who also worked with him on a kit of his original TNG shuttlecraft. (Scott Spicer mastered the shuttle kit, and Jeffrey Waclawski mastered the decals.)

Probert Designs' listing of the shuttle kit

Federation Models' web site

Incidentally, at Probert's Ambassador's theoretical length of 1721 feet, a 1:1400-scale model will measure some 14.75" in length! Very cool!

Basill · August 8 2007, 10:16 PM

Oh my. That's a must have me thinks. I always loved that shuttle design and was upset it didn't feature more in the latter years of TNG. Even though I totally understood the reasons behind it.

ancient · August 8 2007, 10:32 PM

Looks cool. Maybe the ENT-C got some sort of weird refit or was borrowing the engine hull of another ship.

You can explain anything away...

FalTorPan · August 8 2007, 10:54 PM

You know... I don't usually dabble in Trek ship sketching, but the combination of the profile schematic, the color perspective rendering, Probert's 3D WIP image, and my curiosity, have almost convinced me to play with a 3D app in an effort to guess what the rest of the ship might look like.

Fortunately(?) I'm too busy studying for a grad school course waiver exam to do much more than just think about making speculative 3D sketches.

USS Mariner · August 9 2007, 04:40 PM

The God Thing said:
http://www.probertdesigns.com/Folder...sador_Kit.html

As much as I truly respect and admire Probert, I am profoundly saddened that he felt the need (or was directed by the studio?) to incorporate so many questionable design elements from ILM's ghastly USS Excelsior miniature into the NX-10521 and, for that matter, the NCC-1701-D.

TGT

At least he can do it without making the whole thing look like shit.

Besides, I'm sure he wouldn't mind people modifying the kits anyway for this purpose.

EDIT: Those thin nacelles are really ugly. I hope he fixes that as time goes on.

USS Mariner · August 9 2007, 04:44 PM

FalTorPan said:
Probert seems to be working with the people of Federation Models, who also worked with him on a kit of his original TNG shuttlecraft. (Scott Spicer mastered the shuttle kit, and Jeffrey Waclawski mastered the decals.)

Probert Designs' listing of the shuttle kit

Federation Models' web site

Incidentally, at Probert's Ambassador's theoretical length of 1721 feet, a 1:1400-scale model will measure some 14.75" in length! Very cool!

You know what would make me sell my soul?

Three words.

REL, Probert's Ambassador Kit, 1:350.

(A name, a word, and a proportion. Your welcome, TGT.

)

FalTorPan · August 10 2007, 01:39 AM

Mariner Class said:
EDIT: Those thin nacelles are really ugly. I hope he fixes that as time goes on.

I also think wider nacelles would look better.

I suspect that, from the front, the nacelles' width-to-height ratio is supposed to be somewhere between that of Excelsior's nacelles (more tall than wide) and that of Galaxy's nacelles (more wide than tall). A good intermediate design would be nacelles which are more or less equally wide and tall, not unlike the nacelles of Sternbach's version of the Ambassador.

By comparing Probert's 3D CG WIP image with the painting, it seems like the 3D CG WIP's nacelles will have to be pulled inward more. (In the two images, compare the relative position of the port nacelle's forward dome to the edge of the saucer.) Another advantage to wider nacelles is that they won't have to be pulled inward quite as far in order to make the painting and the 3D CG WIP image.