www.ditl.org

Or rather the Yamaguchi variant of the Ambassador class. There's an interesting bit on it at:


http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/artic ... ssador.htm

And DITL has some stuff on the Ambassador class as well.

So for discussion:

What's with the Upside down shuttle bay? Is it even a shuttle bay? If not what would it be? While with artificial gravity it would seem possible to have an inverted section on the ship it doesn't seem to be how things are done.

Where do you think the torp launchers would be? I'm thinking neck for both forward and rear facing.

Finally do you think the Yamaguchi should be considered an upgrade? It's got the fancier sensor dome, larger engineering section, and the Nacelles have been tweaked. If you think it's an upgrade like how the Galaxy class was upgraded what DITL stats would you give it? Bear in mind these things were known (such as in Redemption II) to be getting major refits well after Galaxies and Nebulas were around.

I thought that that "variant" of the Ambassador merely repositioned the nacelles in relation to the pylons, not changed the nacelles themselves.

Obviously the "true" reasoning involves model issues; but in-universe, the differences can be attributed to addressign stresses on the nacelle pylons; an advanced sensor pallet becoming available soon after initial production (thus the different radome;) and an alternate (or easier to get to) cargo area or shuttlebay.

The foreward torpedo launchers appear to be right above the deflector dish. Though, that could be any number of visual thingymagigs.

The nacelles are slightly different in the later models.

And while there have been some cases where model problems have caused changes unless you know something it seems that these changes are more deliberate. Particularily the underslung shuttlebay or whatever.

Got me. I couldn't see anything that looked like torp tubes.

Personaly, I deny the existence of an upside-down shuttlebay.

I don't think of it as upside-down at all. The exterior structure appears as an upside-down version of the Excelsior's; but that's not to say that the workings, internals, etc., are.

Good point. And now my world is back to normal.
What source says that the bulge is a shuttlebay? Is it semi-official, or just conjecture? I'm going to read that article.

I think it was just assumed, because the structure was congruous to the Excelsior's bay. I don't recall either "version" launching a shuttle onscreen.

Ok, next question. Why do they need three shuttlebays? Isn't that overkill?
And ignore my previous post about torp launchers; I was looking at a poor photo, with lots of bloches.

Technically, why do they need two? Since the common wisdom is that the class was more geared toward diplomatic/envoy missions, perhaps an extra, more luxurious bay was installed to receive guests of state; or, one more able to accomodate non-M-class environments.

Very good point. Makes sense too.

Hmmm....my reasoning for differences

1) We know bridge modules are interchangeable and this may merely be a later bridge module, possibly even related the variations

2) Updated sensor systems. The E-C version would've been a few decades old by then.

3) No reason the deflector can't be pulled out and replaced.

4) Possibly a true variation, the E-C could be a first batch version while the later batches may have had more efficient design alterations.

5) same as four

6) Nacelles are modular and this may have been a newer, faster, more efficient version

7) If it is a third shuttlebay it was probably to expand shuttle capacity.

8) Probably a side effect of a third shuttlebay

9) Newer, faster, and more efficient impulse drive

I dunno about expanding much of engineering because of an underslung shuttlebay or whatever.


I also really like Mikeys idea that there could be a pomp and circumstance shuttlebay. And I suppose I could see having a non class M as well, giving the need for 3 of the things.

Though I just occured to me something cool you could do with that setup. A number of newer trek designs (well at least the AKira for certain) feature a "through" shuttlebay. Now there isn't any way to add one of those to the Ambassador. But if you added an elevator between the two you could get something of the same capability with the dual setup on the Yamaguchi. I would think the broader upper one would be for landing. Then towards the end of the bay would be elevators to move the ships lower down, somewhere in there the shuttle/fighter gets restocked/recrewed, and then you could launch ouf of the lower bay. The odd angle produced by that shuttlebay layout could be so outgoing craft can move away from the ship at a sharp angle so as to better avoid incoming craft.

On an Ambassador that could have initially been for colonizing purposes.

The upside dow shuttlebay is not a big issue. Maybe they thought it would help landings nd take offs for some reason.