Wouldn't it rather suggest that the Excelsior's base turn should be higher than what it currently is?.. Not that the Ambassador is made from tin foil.
I'm suggesting, that... at 685 meters (which is very large), the Sovereign has a base turn of (7) and is 2.4 M (volume) when compared to the Ambassador which, is only is 526 meters and 2.8 M (volume). The difference in volume between Ambassador/Sovy is fairly-close when compared to the vast difference in length between them being 159 meters.
Insert the specs on a Galaxy: 642 Meters and 5.8 M (volume) in mass and has the base turn of (6). The length + mass are far more than an Ambassador. That's how I came up with the notion that I could not see the Ambassador having below a 7 for its' base turn.
But...to completely throw everything off...which might suggest otherwise...consider this:, when Ambassador is compared to say, a Nebula Class, at 4.4M (volume), has the base turn of a 9, and, is 440 meters in length, (only a difference of 86 meters).....perhaps the Nebula's base turn is too high???
I don't think anything is written in stone concerning the turn rate of a ship. The Nebula, being a whopping 4.4M (volume) should have a base turn closer to say... 7.5, wouldn't it make more sense if this was how the Devs properly calculated out this formula? Anyone else think there's more to it than that?
the volume difference between the nebula and galaxy on that site cant be right, they should be the same size. the lack of neck and slightly shrunk secondary hull should more then be made up for by the sensor pod imo. they would have to not count that thing or something.
cryptic should calculate the volume of their ship models and re assign inertia and turn values based on that.