There's a million things I haven't done, but just you wait
Member # 343
A few of the Ambassador window rings, especially closer to the center of the saucer, make me wonder if there aren't TWO window rings for 1 deck in some spots.
-------------------- "I never agreed with Jefferson once—we have fought on like seventy-five different fronts. But when all is said & all is done...Jefferson HAS beliefs; Burr has none."
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
Yes, the window placement on the Ambassador class is completely illogical. The top of the saucer must have a couple of decks with two or even three throws of windows. Deck 4 would indeed be a contendor for having three window rows.
This isn't completely unheard of though. For instance, the Galaxy class must have one deck on the top side of the saucer that has two rows of windows (probably either deck 8 or 9).
Anyway, then we have the Ambassador secondary hull. Here we have about half as many window rows as there must be decks. I honestly can't think of any good Trek explanation for this. Obviously the model builder/designers didn't give it enough thought or, most likely, they didn't have enough time.
Another thing worth bringing up - it's pretty silly that the primary hull doesn't have its own impulse engine(s). Maybe there wasn't enough to go around after the four on the Ent-B .
Well, TOS ships had very few windows, while TNG ships had plenty. The E-C probably tried to strike a happy medium. It had more windows than an Excelsior, because the concept of saucertop windows was introduced, but the windows on the secondary hull were just as sparse as in an Excelsior.
And it only seems logical for there to be as many rows of windows on each deck as possible, so that everybody can enjoy a starview.