What I have been thinking for some time about the Ambassador class. Doesn't matter whether or not it is the shown version of Probert's. Personally I like the Probert version as a better representation of Federation technology...
People bandy about lower warp speeds. I disagree, because one of the statements in the various writers guides is that Federation technology has plataued out - in other it is essentially stagnant.
This is a problem for the Federation.
The Ambassador class rings in at 3.71 million metric tons. The layer Galaxy class at 4.96 million metric tons. The only changes deal with the more modern requirements of a more massive ship.
But more massive? Because they could do nothing else.
So the question is "why?"
Because of the size of the Galaxy itself. Our Galaxy is huge in comparison to warp speed... Meaning that any meaningful journey is going into generation ship territory.
Furthermore Section 31, most likely wanted information on the Borg, and had to hide this from general knowledge in Starfleet. Never mind the general public.
The problem with the
Ambassador Class is not its size or scale - it's that it was a rushed studio model, and never completed.
In an ideal world, the FX team would have had the luxury of time and money to build something close to Probert's original design, something that we would have seen more often on screen. But that wasn't what happened, and instead we ended up with what we have. The studio model has
no torpedo launchers,
no tractor beam emitters,
missing phaser arrays and many other
missing details. No attempt was made to correct this at the time of TNG's production, which is why the studio model was quietly retired and not seen that much.
If we want to frame this in-universe, then it's likely the class was a lemon, and Starfleet decided it was better off with the 100-year-old Miranda and Excelsior designs than the brand-new
Ambassador.
BUT...
Enterprises tend not to be lemon ships; they tend to be state-of-the-art, top-of-the-line craft. Given the loss of
Ent-C, maybe Starfleet decided to retire the class? Maybe there simply weren't many built, which is why they weren't seen on screen that much. During the 7-year run of TNG we only saw two
Galaxy Class ships.
But that doesn't change the fact that the studio model was woefully lacking in detail, and I guess it behoves the fan community to "correct" that. Which is something I will, of course, do with this model.
In terms of the size, I think we need to reframe how we think about these ships.
Voyager was bigger than Kirk's
Enterprise, but could only crew 150 people.
Voyager and the
Ent-D were well-designed ships that had been well thought out in terms of what you could fit on each deck. They are probably the closest we get to "perfection" within the Star Trek Universe. The scale of those ships allows them to carry the crews they do, with all the rooms you see on screen, with all the comfort that entails. The
Ambassador fits into that ethos nicely; its "size" makes sense in that context. However, Probert and Sternback were replaced by other designers whose ethos was more about the visual than the practical.
Personally, when I start building these ships, I try to make sense of them, work out how mnay decks they can have, fit windows where windows make sense (and would work) etc etc. I disregard screen accuracy in favour of a rational approach, whilst trying to make sure it "looks" right. It's a balancing act.
Man this is still top 5 Star Trek starships for me and you're nailing it.
Thank you - still cannot believe I made such a rookie mistake about the size... still, it gives me an excuse to rebuild her.
Comments and the like, always welcome. More soon!
