posted
For those of you that either don't have Facebook, or do and don't follow Doug Drexler, he uploaded a few more pictures of the Ambassador class studio model in its final incarnation as the Yamaguchi. Interesting to note that it appears as though they went through the trouble to relabel the model with the Yamaguchi's name and registry, even the tiny labels on the nacelles, but left the Excalibur's registry on the underside of the saucer.
The last five pictures were uploaded to Doug Drexler's Facebook page today while the rest were originally posted on his blog.
-------------------- I haul cardboard and cardboard accessories
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
Can I just say how much I hate—HATE!—the lowered nacelles? Why would you do that? Someone requires a cockpunch.
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Never noticed that before. Why is the right pylon lower than the left one? And is this only the case with the Yamgutshi?
Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
I think the port nacelle just broke a little bit, it probably just dropped down the pylon by accident.
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
^If you look at this pic and this pic, you can see that the port nacelle has been bent at an angle (probably damage done when the model was accidentally dropped). That might explain why the nacelles were lowered, although I don't think they were lowered until after the model was last used as the Yamaguchi (screencaps of "Emissary" show the nacelles higher up, and photos of the model at auction show both nacelles lowered).
I certainly hope this wasn't the reason why the model ended up in a storage crate afterwards. The Ambassador class sorely needed to be shown far more in TNG and DS9 (at least more than that godawful Excelsior). And I'm still pissed off at Okuda for swapping the "6" for a "2" for the registries, because I'm a big fucking nerd who gets mad at stuff like this.
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
Printer-friendly view of this topic
