"Ambassador Class"

posted on November 22nd, 2010, 6:30 pm

Huh, Memory Alpha claims they were Heavy Cruisers when they were at their best rather than Battleships.

Ambassador-class starships were also considered heavy cruisers in their heyday. (TNG: "Conspiracy")

posted on November 22nd, 2010, 6:53 pm

Huh, Memory Alpha claims they were Heavy Cruisers when they were at their best rather than Battleships.

That's true since the first mention of the Ambassador-class was in the first-season-episode "Conspiracies"; Worf pointed out that the Horatio commanded by Walker Keel is a heavy cruiser, Ambassador-class. Sadly we never saw the Horatio before it was already turned into debris 

posted on November 22nd, 2010, 11:57 pm

by the time of conspiracy the galaxy class was already in service. the first season was roughly 2364. the galaxy was designed in the 2350s

that means by then the ambassador is probably around 20-50 years old. the excel was said to be a large and powerful ship in the movies. so it was probably the best starfleet had.

the next step up seems to be the ambas. the ambas was probably the best starfleet ever made, at the time it was made. which follows the convention that the best class gets the next enterprise. im sure connies were something special back in pike's day. as each new enterprise gets made, the previous one looks weaker. by now the excel is a destroyer as it is so old and weak. the galaxy is a battleship. the ambas seems like a heavy cruiser.

[Tyler]

posted on November 23rd, 2010, 12:03 am

Last edited by Tyler on November 23rd, 2010, 12:08 am, edited 1 time in total.

That goes with the assumption Starfleet always builds Battleships. If they decide not to build them, a Heavy Cruiser (or Battle Cruiser to the Klingons) would be the best they had.

Not only did it say they were Heavy Cruisers in their prime (Memory Alpha, haven't heard the actual speech recently), but the best ship we saw of TOS and pre-Excelsior TMP (Constitution Class) was a Heavy Cruiser.

posted on November 23rd, 2010, 12:16 am

That goes with the assumption Starfleet always builds Battleships.

starfleet doesnt build any battleships. we assign this name to these ships because they remind us of naval battleships.

my point is that the newest class is usually bigger and better armed than previous classes. and that by ordering them by combat capabilities we derive the terms battleship etc. so the galaxy was a battleship because it would win a 1on1 fight vs other starfleet classes.

when the connie was new, probably a decade before pike's time on the enterprise, it probably was starfleets strongest ship. like the excel became the strongest, then the ambas, then the galaxy, then the sovvie etc.

they are the prestige ships, build in few numbers. the akira is weaker than a sovvie, but probably gets built in larger numbers, it strikes me as a cruiser. cruisers are more cost effective, and arguably more important, but the sovvie is the battleship.

it is my opinion that when the ambas was new, it was bigger and better than the excel. and that starfleet was building excels in larger numbers by this time. and when the galaxy came along, the ambas was relegated down to a cruiser role and the excel relegated again. the connie was then pushed into the museums, the miranda wouldnt go peacefully, so got to stay in as cannon fodder

[Tyler]

posted on November 23rd, 2010, 12:30 am

Last edited by Tyler on November 23rd, 2010, 12:34 am, edited 1 time in total.

Starfleet doesn't build Battleships, aside from the Battleships that come from its yards. Starfleet gives them different names, but they're still the same; battleship = most powerfully armed and defended around. Why they designed the Galaxy as one, I'll never know...

Ambassadors have less weapons than an Excelsior; Excelsiors have 10 phasers (whether any were added by the refit or simply upgraded is unknown) and 4 torpedo launchers (art says 6) while an Ambassador has 10 phasers and 2 torpedo launchers.

Star Trek Heavy Cruisers are only described as 'large multi-purpose starships'. Anyway, best doesn't always equal battleship. The Galaxy Class Battleship was always called an Explorer.

posted on November 23rd, 2010, 12:34 am

Huh, Memory Alpha claims they were Heavy Cruisers when they were at their best rather than Battleships.

Unless I rememebr wrong, didnt the khitomer accords plus the aftermath of the Tomad incident, which meant prolonged peace along the Klingon and Rom boarders, meant that starfleet didnt bother with larger ships that much, which WOULD fit with teh Ambasador being launched as a Heavy Cruiser

back in pike's day

Dont forget April


And Tyler, the number of phasers doesnt really matter.

The Excel had point phasers, the Ambas had early phaser strips, so the Ambas no doubt had much higher firepower.

As for the torp tubes, more evidence the Ambas wasnt really armed as a battleship, but as more of a cruiser.

[Tyler]

posted on November 23rd, 2010, 12:38 am

Last edited by Tyler on November 23rd, 2010, 12:46 am, edited 1 time in total.

Firepower comes from how much power you can put into the weapon, the strip type was likely just easier and more durable rather than inherently stronger. Starfleet's all about making ships work better, rather than hit harder.

Number of weapons matters; the more you have, the more back-ups you have to replace damaged ones in battle along with covering more arcs. That applies for all types of weapon.

[quaddmgtech]

posted on November 23rd, 2010, 12:46 am

Last edited by quaddmgtech on November 23rd, 2010, 12:55 am, edited 1 time in total.

Firepower comes from how much power you can put into the weapon, the strip type was likely just easier and more durable rather than inherently stronger.

Number of weapons matters; the more you have, the more back-ups you have to replace damaged ones in battle along with covering more arcs. That applies for all types of weapon.

Indeed there is no evidence to support that phaser strips are necessarily more powerful than classic emitters only that they improve firing arc.

The power output of the vessel has much more to do with how much energy can be directed to the weapons systems.

posted on November 23rd, 2010, 1:00 am

They're newer, and used exclusivley on newer ships. That would imply more power.

Plus I seem to recall mentions on episodes and tech guides basicly saying the greater surface area allowed greater charge to be built or some such.

posted on November 23rd, 2010, 11:35 am

I don't recall that being said in canon and tech manuals aren't canon. They were never implied to be stronger by nature and being newer doesn't mean a thing; more advanced and more brute force are 2 different things. The power of both systems depends on what the ship can generate.

What's with the screenship? It's well known what the Galaxy Class looks like.

[quaddmgtech]

posted on November 23rd, 2010, 5:44 pm

Last edited by quaddmgtech on November 23rd, 2010, 5:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.

What's with the screenship? It's well known what the Galaxy Class looks like.

@ Tyler
I think it's an attempt at showing how the phaser strips on a Galaxy look when it's firing...

@ Tok'ra
Again this implies NOTHING in terms of strip type-phasers being more or less powerful than classic emitters. In all likely-hood the Galaxy Class Phaser can output much greater firepower than an Excelsior Phaser, but this has to do with the overall power output of the vessel NOT the type of emitter.

posted on November 23rd, 2010, 6:51 pm

True, however in TNG you often see the phaser strip glowing as it builds to fire, this implies it builds up a charge.

Now, if the strip not only acted as emitter but as a capaciter, that would allow a much greater ammount of power stored for release.

posted on November 23rd, 2010, 7:23 pm

True, however in TNG you often see the phaser strip glowing as it builds to fire, this implies it builds up a charge.

Now, if the strip not only acted as emitter but as a capaciter, that would allow a much greater ammount of power stored for release.

'If' being the key word here. 

posted on November 23rd, 2010, 9:57 pm

starfleet doesnt build battleships, they build ships which we compare to battleships as they are sorta similar.

as u say the galaxy is an explorer. sisko even said their first ship designed for combat was the defiant.

starfleet makes its largest ships even though they arent as cost effective. when they were new they were big and had the latest tech. the galaxy was said to be starfleet's most advanced ship. at the time it was. just like the sovvie then was. just like the excel was when it was made. thats the pattern i am basing my assertion on, that the ambas was starfleet's most advanced ship at the time. starfleet would build limited numbers of them, while making many more excels. later the galaxy was the newest, they would make few numbers of the most advanced ship, to show off. while the majority of the fleet would be something else. the sovvie is the fancy ship, that isnt really important, its flashy, and advanced, but the akira is the more useful ship. the ambas was most comparable to a battleship at the time it was new.

it wasnt designed for battle, but its the large heavy hitter, so sounds like a battleship. even though the excel had more numerous little weapons i would bet the ambas is stronger in battle. the ship classes that get enterprises are usually the fanciest ship of their era.

about phaser array vs phaser turret things, there is no way of knowing which is more powerful, i think the ambas puts more power in its phasers than the excel, its bigger and newer and has more advanced technology in it. so an ambas would slap an excel down hard in battle.