posted
While looking at my Ambassador model, which I temporarily taped together for the heck of it, I found that the Bussard Collectors sit strinkingly close to the saucer section. While I was looking at this, I began to think how Bussard Collectors work. Bussards use fields to suck up stray atoms in space. Well, as I put this idea of how Bussard Collectors together, and the way the Bussard Collectors sit on the Ambassador, I found that the Bussard Collectors could quite possibly be taking atoms right off the hull directly in front of it, and possibly all around it.
Is it possible for the Bussard Collectors to do harm and actually deteriate the hull of starships? If this is true, how long would it take until the hull was signifigantly weakened and would have to be replaced?
posted
No, it isn't really possible. Bussard's gather in stray hydrogen atoms from surrounding space. Now, unless your ship is constructed entirely out of hydrogen atoms, the collector won't interact with it all.
Of course, if your ship IS constructed like that, you have other things to worry about.
------------------ "I am just a worthless liar. I am just an imbecile. I will only complicate you. Trust in me and fall as well." -- Tool
posted
We should accept that the Ambassador model has some flaws.
- The window spacing/amount seems very odd. Too many windows in the saucer but too few in engineering. - If the saucer separates it will leave the only impulse engine behind. Is someone supposed to get out and push?
I actually don't have a problem with the Bussards.
------------------ "Forgive me if I don't share your euphoria!" (Weyoun to Dukat, DS9 'Tears of the Prophets')
[This message has been edited by Dax (edited August 22, 1999).]
posted
Can anyone say where the torp. launchers are on the Ambassador? I refuse to accept that one of Starfleet's greatest flagships didn't have anything greater than phasers, but I have yet to see it firing a photon!
------------------ -Smooth as an androids butt, eh Data? -Yes, and remarkably similar in appearance!
posted
Windows: Maybe the windows for the quarters are actually on the roof? There are 7 rows of windows, each speaced out differently from the next row. The first four rows, are the area from the phaser strip to the lip of the saucer, all appear to be about evenly spaced. If each row counted as a deck, and just by eyeballing my model, I'd say 10 decks in the top of the saucer, not including the raised shuttlebay/bridge area. Anyone think 10 decks is too much?
Saucer Seperation: Maybe the neck goes with the saucer...
Torpedo Launchers: More then likely there is one in the neck, like the Galaxy, except there is no physical evidence on the model that it's there. There could also be one up in the 6-sided sensor done, probably one deck above. Aft facing torpedo launchers might be stuck in the 'wings' of the warp pylons. Maybe even forward facing ones there too...
posted
There appears to be a saucer separation line just below the first two rows of windows in the neck. Unfortunately, the impulse engine is located below this and would be left behind.
I really can't work out the deck structure of the ship. The window spacing seems bizarre to me.
The studio model doesn't appear to have any torpedo launchers.
------------------ "Forgive me if I don't share your euphoria!" (Weyoun to Dukat, DS9 'Tears of the Prophets')
posted
Maybe the Ambassador Class was not designed to separate. Those separation lines could be something else. And where is/are the aft torpedo launcher(s)? I can believe that the foward launcher(s) is in the same position as the Galaxy Class, but the aft launcher(s) is/are a different story. I have no real clue to where one even is. Maybe they pop out from somewhere like the foward topedo launchers of the Exclesior Class?
------------------ "Its origin and purpose, still a total mystery."
posted
It's strange that the Excelsior has two aft launchers yet the Ambassador has none. What did you mean about the Excelsior forward launchers, Michael? The tubes are clearly located 3 decks below the base of the neck.
I like to think that all of the Enterprise type ships can saucer separate in some form. The Ambassador-class seems to be the only one that wouldn't have an impulse engine.
Oh, does anyone know what those things on the neck of the Excelsior-class are? Are they phaser banks?
------------------ "Forgive me if I don't share your euphoria!" (Weyoun to Dukat, DS9 'Tears of the Prophets')
posted
What things on the neck Dax? And I found out what those things were I was referring to as torpedo launchers in "Generations," they were apparently cargo bays or something at the neck. As for saucer separation on the Ambassador Class, it could be possible since the Constitution Class Enterprise (1701 and 1701-A) apparently could do that without the impulse engines. But yet the only saucer separation on Federation starships I've seen was on the USS Enterprise-D and the USS Prometheus NX-59650.
------------------ "Its origin and purpose, still a total mystery."
posted
Both the normal Constitution-class and its refit have the impulse engine on the back of the saucer. If the saucer separates it must keep those engines. It doesn't matter if engineering doesn't have its own engine. The Galaxy-class is the only Enterprise designed to operate as two separate functioning vessels. The other Enterprises only worry about the saucer.
------------------ "Forgive me if I don't share your euphoria!" (Weyoun to Dukat, DS9 'Tears of the Prophets')
Printer-friendly view of this topic
