Ambassador Class

[Psyco Diver]

I just thought of a good example, the USS Enterprise. The Nimitz was already in planning when they first started building it, yet it was some years away from being started but they still built the Big E either way. It was a costly ship to build so they only built one, even though they planned 6, even so with the Nimitz in planning they planned to make 10 anyways. Kinda funny I think, the Big E represents the transition from WWII era ships to modern. Its not as modern as the Nimitz, but more than a match for anything else out there. Its still a strong ship, its a shame their decommisioning it in 2013. Anways this is the way I see the Ambassador class, all the new tech coming together, worked out, made better, then put into the Galaxy, Nebula, ect ect

[candle_86]

well the thing with the Big E was budget cuts to the navy at the time, as it was felt there current WW2/Korea Carriers where doing just fine, when they got funds and premission to build more Carriers again the Enterprise Class Carrier was obsolete.

[undedavenger]

Still, one of the first Gerald Ford Class carriers needs to be named Enterprise. Complete with a plaque on the Bridge that looks like the ones from Trek! "5th Ship to bear the name", etc.

[undedavenger]

Well my opinion is like this.

Why do you see a lot of other classes? Like say Miranda class ships, Excelsior Class Ships etc? Would you send your top of the line ships into battle? Yeah, Ambassador, Galaxy Class Ships, etc are all 'battle' ships to a extent. The rest of the fleet is just back up pretty much.

Ah, but in infantry warfare, do you send your colonels and generals to the front lines? No. Why? They are much harder to replace. Same goes for larger, more costly ships. The disparaging term is "cannon fodder". Look at all the Mirandas that just disintegrated fighting the Dominion...

[ACES_HIGH]

I just thought of a good example, the USS Enterprise. The Nimitz was already in planning when they first started building it, yet it was some years away from being started but they still built the Big E either way. It was a costly ship to build so they only built one, even though they planned 6, even so with the Nimitz in planning they planned to make 10 anyways. Kinda funny I think, the Big E represents the transition from WWII era ships to modern. Its not as modern as the Nimitz, but more than a match for anything else out there. Its still a strong ship, its a shame their decommisioning it in 2013. Anways this is the way I see the Ambassador class, all the new tech coming together, worked out, made better, then put into the Galaxy, Nebula, ect ect

Yeah, they're still experimenting with the new tech at the time, and it's not quite mature enough to build Galaxy.  Maybe they're still not quite sure how everything's going to work together.  Using the CVN-65 Enterprise as an example, the navy built it with eight reactors, simply for the reason that the technology was new and they didn't know how efficient it would be, and the current standard in conventional carriers, the CVA-63 Kitty Hawk class, had 8 boilers.  In fact, Enterprise can't safely run all eight for more than a short time, without risking shaking itself apart.

[captain_obvious]

I just thought of a good example, the USS Enterprise. The Nimitz was already in planning when they first started building it, yet it was some years away from being started but they still built the Big E either way. It was a costly ship to build so they only built one, even though they planned 6, even so with the Nimitz in planning they planned to make 10 anyways. Kinda funny I think, the Big E represents the transition from WWII era ships to modern. Its not as modern as the Nimitz, but more than a match for anything else out there. Its still a strong ship, its a shame their decommisioning it in 2013. Anways this is the way I see the Ambassador class, all the new tech coming together, worked out, made better, then put into the Galaxy, Nebula, ect ect

Yeah, they're still experimenting with the new tech at the time, and it's not quite mature enough to build Galaxy.  Maybe they're still not quite sure how everything's going to work together.  Using the CVN-65 Enterprise as an example, the navy built it with eight reactors, simply for the reason that the technology was new and they didn't know how efficient it would be, and the current standard in conventional carriers, the CVA-63 Kitty Hawk class, had 8 boilers.  In fact, Enterprise can't safely run all eight for more than a short time, without risking shaking itself apart.

and taking 2 or 3 of them out would mean that the whole reactor system and associated subsystems would need a total redesign, not to mention the possibility of the ship being left an underpowered hulk!

[MR. Nevyn]

Maybe because there aren't supposed to be many Ambassador-class starships around? I mean, it's a lot cheaper and easier to simply refit those hundreds of not thousands Excelsior-class flying around than to make completely new ships. And keep in mind, the bigger a ship is the longer it takes to make one. That's why there are so many Nebula's , Defiants and Akira's compared to the small number of Galaxy's.

What the real reason might be, maybe the creators simply didn't like the Ambassador-Class? It's a fact that no CGI model was made of the Ambassador while one was made of the Excelsior and Miranda.

[Maxloef]

i thought i read somewhere the studio model like burned down or someting..could be mistaken...

[Nebula]

i thought i read somewhere the studio model like burned down or someting..could be mistaken...

nope... the studio model wasn't lost... it was sold in the trek auction a few years ago.

[JimmyB76]

any idea how much it sold for?  how i wish i could have been the one to buy it...

[ACES_HIGH]

According to MA it sold for $40,000