Look at a picture of the nacelle pylon and you'll see why those phaser strips can't fire beneath the ship!
James
James
Ambassador class phasers and crew
- Thread starter James Wright
- Start date
The shadow cone beneath the ship would be fairly small, though. Only an enemy that managed to get to within a hundred meters of the ship would be able to make use of the blind spot - and it's difficult to imagine how an enemy could close to such a distance when the phasers would be perfectly capable of reaching him for the preceding hundred thousand kilometers or more.
To be sure, we only know that the E-C didn't have a ventral strip. The actual onscreen images of the other Ambassadors aren't conclusive: that is, they don't reveal the absence of the strip from the model, because they are taken from forgiving angles. So we could just as well claim that the strip is there on all the other ships, and Starfleet only left it out from the very earliest models because, dunno, curved strips were more difficult to do than flat ones?
Timo Saloniemi
To be sure, we only know that the E-C didn't have a ventral strip. The actual onscreen images of the other Ambassadors aren't conclusive: that is, they don't reveal the absence of the strip from the model, because they are taken from forgiving angles. So we could just as well claim that the strip is there on all the other ships, and Starfleet only left it out from the very earliest models because, dunno, curved strips were more difficult to do than flat ones?
Timo Saloniemi
Well, I can't remember where I read/saw this, and I doubt it's from a canon source, but I once read that the Ambassador was the first class to introduce phaser array strips as it's primary offensive/defensive beam weapon. All other ships to that point had the ball turret phasers, or limited use of small strips. I wouldn't be surprised if the underside is one of the places on the ship that the ball turrets are primarily used. I'd assume that the ship would have a few scattered throughout the ship as a back up, just in case the relatively new strips failed.
Perhaps since the ship had phaser strips on the ventral saucer, the designers assumed that that, and the nacelle pylon strips would be enough major ventral coverage. There could be a ball turret or two on the underside of the engineering hull, just to enhance the phaser coverage.
Perhaps since the ship had phaser strips on the ventral saucer, the designers assumed that that, and the nacelle pylon strips would be enough major ventral coverage. There could be a ball turret or two on the underside of the engineering hull, just to enhance the phaser coverage.
In terms of strict canon, for whomever cares, the lowest registry number on a strip-phaser ship indeed belongs to an Ambassador - USS Zhukov, NCC-26136. That is, this is the lowest-registried Ambassador that was actually seen on screen; backstage sources give lower registries for two other ships, including the class ship.
The second-lowest-registried ship type that is known to have strip phasers would be Niagara, a similarly sized vessel that has Galaxy style nacelles. The lowest noncanon example would be USS Wellington at NCC-28473, but we never actually saw that ship on screen and we could speculate that it had an earlier type of engine and perhaps lacked strip phasers and whatnot. When we do see a Niagara, she carries a much higher registry (USS Princeton is NCC-59804), perhaps indicating a later production batch and possibly suggesting more modern systems than on the Wellington (although one would think that the earlier ship was also refitted at some point).
Of course, we can speculate that the early Ambassadors also lacked strips and were refitted with them only later on, prior to the 2340s when the E-C was lost. So we can't be completely sure about the date of the introduction of strip phasers. But I do like the idea that they originally only existed on the largest ships, these being the two-engined Ambassador and the three-engined Niagara from the very early 24th century. They'd only be introduced to medium starships at around the 2340s-50s timeframe and the NCC-50000 registry range.
Timo Saloniemi
The second-lowest-registried ship type that is known to have strip phasers would be Niagara, a similarly sized vessel that has Galaxy style nacelles. The lowest noncanon example would be USS Wellington at NCC-28473, but we never actually saw that ship on screen and we could speculate that it had an earlier type of engine and perhaps lacked strip phasers and whatnot. When we do see a Niagara, she carries a much higher registry (USS Princeton is NCC-59804), perhaps indicating a later production batch and possibly suggesting more modern systems than on the Wellington (although one would think that the earlier ship was also refitted at some point).
Of course, we can speculate that the early Ambassadors also lacked strips and were refitted with them only later on, prior to the 2340s when the E-C was lost. So we can't be completely sure about the date of the introduction of strip phasers. But I do like the idea that they originally only existed on the largest ships, these being the two-engined Ambassador and the three-engined Niagara from the very early 24th century. They'd only be introduced to medium starships at around the 2340s-50s timeframe and the NCC-50000 registry range.
Timo Saloniemi
Hey, I always care, Timo. 
You are quite correct of course, as always. By close examination, the Zhukov would technically be the earliest number with a strip. I agree that only the biggest ships would have had strips at first, then introduce them to smaller ships at NCC-50000, in circa 2345.
You are quite correct of course, as always. By close examination, the Zhukov would technically be the earliest number with a strip. I agree that only the biggest ships would have had strips at first, then introduce them to smaller ships at NCC-50000, in circa 2345.
