Flare Sci-Fi Forums: Ambassador class torp launcher question...

This is topic Ambassador class torp launcher question... in forum Starships & Technology at Flare Sci-Fi Forums.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://flare.solareclipse.net/ultimatebb.php/topic/6/870.html

Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :

We have canon evidence that the Nebula class can fire under the saucer, but to this day I have yet to see a model or computer-mesh of the Ambassador-class with torpedo launchers.

The thing is that in a Star Trek magazine six months ago I saw a poster depicting "Yesterday's Enterprise", with the E-C in the foreground, the E-D covering it's back and three BoP's in pursuit.
The poster was highly detailed and over the Ambassador's deflector-dish I could see two clearly defined holes, Constitution-style. This is also backed up by zoom-scenes in "YE" when you clearly see a yellow-glowing stripe over the def-dish.

So why has neither the SFA-artists nor any modelmakers work I've ever seen included the most important tactical system of ST-ships?

------------------
Ready for the action now, Dangerboy
Ready if I'm ready for you, Dangerboy
Ready if I want it now, Dangerboy?
How dare you, dare you, Dangerboy?
How dare you, Dangerboy?
I dare you, dare you, Dangerboy...

�on Flux, "Thanatophobia"

Posted by Starship Freak (Member # 293) on :

Any chance of a full scan?

------------------
"The Starships of the Federation are the physical, tangible manifestations of Humanity�s stubborn insistence that life does indeed mean something."
Spock to Leonard McCoy in "Final Frontier"

Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :

Which issue is it? I might have it and if I do, I can scan it.

------------------
"Incest! A game the whole family can play!"
-Jonah Rapp

Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :

I didn't buy it but the store it came from save their editions for a long time, so I'll check it out when I can, OK?
I have some sort of throat-virus for the moment, with all the fever I can carry, so I won't be going anywhere for a while.
(If only you knew how long it took me to spell that...)

What I wonder is why the onscreen-evidence has been overlooked all this time...

�on Flux, "Thanatophobia"

Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :

I've looked at screengrabs from YE and pics of the studio model and there is indeed a forward torp launcher. The YE views probably confuse people because that yellow light looks like an ordinary lighted window or may look like it comes from the starboard nacelle. However I still don't know about aft launchers.

------------------
Teddy Roosevelt: "Speak softly and carry a big stick."
Yosemite Sam: "Well, I speak loudly and I carry a bigger stick...and I use it too!"

Posted by Savar on :

The forward torpedo launchers are indeed present on the studio model and can also be found on the Amt/Ertl model kit. Referring to the photos in Star Trek Mechanics, I can find no evidence of aft launchers. One might hypothesize that they could be placed just below the fantail, but there are no ports of any kind that would suggest torpedo launch tubes.

Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :

I believe it has been stated a couple of times that Rick Sternbach originally wanted the ship to have relatively easily distinguishable forward tubes plus a ventral transverse phaser strip on the secondary hull (see his sketch in "TNG:The Continuing Mission", with a torp launcher similar to that in the Andy Probert painting that apparently was also used as the basis of the inaccurate wall relief E-C in the Observation Lounge).

However, due to a mixup with the blueprints sent to the modelmakers, these details were basically omitted from the first version of the ship. Also, the stern contours were not what Rick really wanted.

When the ship was redressed into the "Yamagochi" configuration used in appearances following the "Yesterday's Enterprise" one, the stern contours were altered, and I believe the torp launcher thingy might have been "enhanced" at this time as well, along with other added detail (and as we know, for some reason the saucer and nacelles were relocated). The ventral phaser strip wasn't added, though. The modelmakers may have given up on it because it would be where the ventral motion-control rig attachment point is, and would have to be made of segments if one wanted to cover up the hole and do belly shots of the ship.

I must confess I can't really see the forward tubes in either the E-C or the Yamagochi versions, but I'll keep looking. As for aft tubes, see those faint round things flanking the impulse nozzle? Perhaps there could be hatch-covered torp launchers there. At least, this is the most practical aft-facing flat surface I can think of - the fantail is too curved, and too congested with the double shuttlebays.

Timo Saloniemi

Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :

But why would you cover a torpedo launcher with a hatch? Doesn't make sense, IMHO.

------------------
"Cry havoc and let's slip the dogs of Evil"

Posted by Vacuum robot lady from Spaceballs (Member # 239) on :

quote:
...the "Yamagochi"...

So, is this like an Ambassador that you keep in your pocket and feed and stuff?

------------------
"What happens if a big asteroid hits the Earth? Judging from realistic simulations involving a sledge hammer and a common laboratory frog, we can assume it will be pretty bad."
- Dave Barry

Posted by Savar on :

Can't fault you for not finding the forward tubes, Timo, they are rather tiny. Screencaps aren't high resolution enough. I can only see them in photos of the Enterprise-C studio model. I can't find ANY tubes at all on the Yamaguchi.

Actually, the forward tubes on the Enterprise are more pronounced on the Amt/Ertl model than on the actual studio model. The model kit has two tiny nubs whereas the studio model seems to have only two tiny slits which when lit appear to be windows.

I dug through my files and found a couple photos of the Yamaguchi's impulse engines. The square details on either side do indeed look like they might be some kind of hatches, but from a logical point of view, I wouldn't want to launch guided warheads from a point so close to super-heated exhaust!

Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :

But if I had to, I'd be sure to keep the launchers covered with hatches the rest of the time.

Timo Saloniemi

Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :

I would put a hatch over the torpedo launchers. Imagine how much space debris would clutter up inside that hole!

------------------
"The things hollow--it goes on forever--and--oh my God!--it's full of stars!" -David Bowman's last transmission back to Earth, 2001: A Space Odyssey

The 359 Webpage

Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :

That's what the deflector field is for...

------------------
"It's like the Star of David or something. But without the whole Judaism thing."
-Frank Gerratana, 17-Aug-2000

Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :

I was just going to trash them too for talking about such 20th century contraptions like retractable hatch-covers, hrumph!!!

But then I started thinking, it would be a pretty dramatic effect if, prior to the mandatory "Battle Stations"-line, the captain would say "ready torpedos!" and a close-up would show the torpedo-muzzles being "undone", like in "Crimson Tide". Kinda like DS), when readying weapons in the battle-ep's.

Good info there, Savar, about the model-differences.

I'm still in too bad shape to take a ride into town and check out that magazine, Fabrux, but I can tell you all I know about it.
The picture I was talking about was on the cover and in the article, not a poster.

It was a very prominent article, about all the timeline-related episodes in Star Trek. All the mixing/travels of time-lines, like "City On The Edge Of Forever", "Trials And Tribbleations" and soforth...

"YE" had a big part in it. That give you a clue?

�on Flux, "Thanatophobia"

Posted by Savar on :

The issue referred to is #127 of Star Trek Communicator. I remembered this article too and searched through all my Star Trek The Magazine issues before I realized I was looking at the wrong publication.

The picture is a great illustration, but is not a production still. I have a large archive of starship images collected for model references, but I have yet to find a good, clear, detailed production still of any Ambassador-class ship.

The illustration seems to have used the AMT/Ertl model as a reference. It clearly shows the two nubs one the forward edge of the connecting dorsal just above the deflector dish exactly as is found on the model. However, this feature cannot be found one the physical model. There are only two tiny backlit slits on the real models. White light shines from behind them, which make them look like simple windows. From a modelling perspective, the nubs are inaccurate, looking more like old-style phaser ball-turrets. When I get around to working on the "C", I'll probably take these off and drill two tiny ports for the launch tubes.

I'm probably in the minority, but I have always liked the Ambassador Class design, more so than the Galaxy. I suppose because the Ambassador borrows so many design elements from the "classic" starship shape: The big ROUND saucer, the big glowing deflector, the classically shaped fantail... Don't like the re-designed Yamaguchi as much.

Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :

Here she is... and beautiful!

------------------
"Incest! A game the whole family can play!"
-Jonah Rapp

[This message has been edited by Fabrux (edited August 31, 2000).]

Posted by Starship Freak (Member # 293) on :

I�m with you Savar, the Ambassador-class is my favourite design amongst Federation starships. Also the history behind the Enterprise-C, going down while defending the Klingons at Narendra III, just plain great. Damned shame that they didn�t include any Ambassadors in the recent DS9 battlescenes, now we�ll never see it on screen again.

Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :

A friend of mine who is also an Ambassador-phile has a picture of the Ambasador studio model, intact. And if this photo is post 1993, then he'll be more than a little miffed.

------------------
"Incest! A game the whole family can play!"
-Jonah Rapp