PDA

View Full Version : Enterprise vs. Star Destroyer


Pages : 1 [2]

soulsling
05-07-2000, 11:10 AM
im done. too much pain in my gut to keep reading this stuff now. :D good laughs fellas.

SPOOFE
05-07-2000, 07:57 PM
Yeah, I think this thread's kinda dying out. I'm impressed... I was expecting just a few responses, and here I get 250.

Kudos to all the imaginations out there!! 'Twas fun as hell, even if we all didn't see eye-to-eye.

tracer
05-07-2000, 08:16 PM
Okay, then, Spoofe, new scenario:

Both the Enterprise NCC-1701-D and the Imperial Star Destroyer know the full extent of each others' capabilities, and have adequate time to prepare battle tactics. They have not, however, had any opportunity (or success) in duplicating any part of each others' technology. They both decide to destroy the other ship, if the other ship cannot be captured; there will be no initial hails, and no negotiations. They meet in orbit around some Earth-like planet, each expecting the other with all systems and weapons armed and ready.

NOW who will win?

soulsling
05-07-2000, 10:46 PM
me, i win, 'cause i'm really a Q, and i just wipe the pallate clean and take all the pretty women with me and go home.

:D ok, more on the tab here...

How about we eliminate the force, and any other crew/person/being other then the crew of the two ships, (no guinan), no communications outside their ships, no tie fighters or shuttles, no tachyon particles to form time space continuim twists, just ship/crew to ship/crew.
Darth has no force to use, he's just big bad meany.
I'm for that.

Monster104
05-07-2000, 10:48 PM
Well, Tracer:

If they know everything about each other, the ISD would be expecting ranged photorp attacks, and would prepare accordingly.

The Enterprise would expect microjump maneuvers and would prepare accordingly.

It's pretty much a stalemate on either side until someone comes up with really unorthodox strategies, which would probably lean the favor of battle towards the Enterprise.

Now, we could add a little spice to this and pick a specific ISD (Like the Devastator, Avenger, Conquest, etc.) which would give us a better comparison. Since Devastator is a flagship, it would have the best trained, most efficient crew possible, which would put it more on par with the Enterprise (also a flagship).

But don't you think this would escalate into a full scale war between the Empire and the Federation?

tracer
05-07-2000, 11:44 PM
If they know everything about each other, the ISD would be expecting ranged photorp attacks, and would prepare accordingly.

How would they prepare for attacks from warp-speed weapons fired from a warp-speed ship? They can't do a microjump once every second, can they?

SPOOFE
05-08-2000, 05:56 AM
Okay, okay, Tracer's scenario....

The Star Destroyer (Let's say the Devastator... that was the ship that capture the Tantive IV at the very beginning of Episode IV) has a good-sized knowledge of the Enterprise (layout, crew complement, etc.), but not INTIMATE knowledge (where specific power relays are, who sleeps where, crew shifts, etc). And vice versa. They're given time to prepare a battle plan with this valuable information, and they have a battlefield already chosen (let's say Q or whatever imprinted that notion into everyone's head). We have standard, well-trained crews, each quite capable with his or her duties onboard the ship. Now how do things play out?

Well, now this is a lot more interesting. A lot more variables here, dozens of likely ways that either ship can win, and probably hundreds of unlikely ways.

Okay, the battleground is an Earth-like planet... breathable atmosphere, one good-sized moon, no weird rings or energy zones surrounding it, no quantum fissures... standard, boring stuff. So many possibilities, so many possibilities...

One scenario might go like this: The Enterprise arrives in orbit around the planet just as the Devastator arrives on the opposite side. The E's sensors are able to detect the ship on the opposite side, while the D's sensors aren't (I don't think they're capable... I've never seen any evidence that they are). The E separates, the saucer section going one way and the nacelle section going the other (they also launch their shuttlecraft to take other routes around the planet). They all pop over the horizon at the same instant, firing phasers, torpedoes, and what have you. This is kept up for several seconds before the D begins getting too close to one of the sections (probably the saucer section... it's more vulnerable). The saucer section backs off, still firing torpedoes and phasers (if the saucer section doesn't carry photon torpedoes, just ignore that). The D can't perform a microjump since it's too close to a gravity well, so it begins pulling to a higher orbit. Meanwhile, the TIE fighters, gunboats, blastboats, etc. have been pounding on the shuttlecraft... maybe even destroying one or two. The ones that aren't destroyed return to the saucer section, promptin the TIE's to begin attacking the nacelle section. This effectively draws the nacelle section out of the fight for a while. In the meantime, the D has pulled out of the planet's gravity well and is capable of a microjump... the saucer section doesn't know this, and therefore isn't anticipating the microjump that pulls the D right up next to it. The D locks on all tractor beams, isolating the saucer section into place (it's impulse engines wouldn't be able to break, and it can't go to warp by itself). The D opens up with full guns... and half the Enterprise goes up in smoke. While this is happening, the nacelle section has managed to swat down the smaller ships that have been bugging it with minimal damage to itself. Now it's a slugfest 'tween the Devastator, with some battle damage, and the Enterprise's nacelle section... the section with most of the weaponry, power, and defenses, I might add.

What happens next? I dunno. Now would be a good time for the nacelle section to fly around in warp, dropping torpedoes as it does so.

I can post more scenarios/possible scenarios tomorrow... it's late, and I'm going to bed, with visions of Star Destroyers dancing in my head. Good night, everybody!

tracer
05-08-2000, 04:06 PM
I personally think that separating the saucer section would be a very bad move -- unless you separate long before the battle and leave the saucer section someplace safe to protect all the civilians and families on board. As you mentioned, the saucer section does not have warp drive, which makes it a sitting duck for the Star Destroyer to pound on. It also lacks any torpedo launchers (both the forward and the aft photorp launch tubes are on the secondary hull), and its phaser emitter ring packs neither the punch nor the faster-than-light capability of good old-fashioned photon torpedoes. Feh. There's a reason the lower half of the ship is referred to as the "battle section," and its bridge the "battle bridge," when the Enterprise is separated.

SPOOFE
05-08-2000, 07:35 PM
Thanks, Tracer, for clarifying. And you're right, of course... the saucer is where all the "civilian" stuff goes on while the battle section has all the war stuff.

A good tactic for the Enterprise would be to try to engage the Devastator with the battle section and use the saucer section to take out the support ships. Not the ideal vessel to take out starfighters, but it (and its' shuttles) should be able to take out a TIE fighter (and maybe a gunboat or two... though the Skipray blastboats can do it some serious damage).

The battle section of the E would be better off without the saucer slowing it down... it'd be less of a target, would be able to strengthen the shields, be more maneuverable, etc.

tracer
05-12-2000, 06:07 PM
I just looked up the allocation of equipment between the battle section and the saucer section in the Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual. Turns out, the battle section does have phaser emitter arrays -- in fact, it is bristling with phasers. However, each battle section phaser emitter array is much shorter than the main circular emitter arrays on the top and bottom of the saucer section. Thus, each phaser on the battle section has fewer emitter array segments that can combine their firepower together into a single, focused beam.

Not that the phasers on either section would be useful if the ship was travelling faster-than-light, of course.

SPOOFE
05-13-2000, 01:08 AM
As far as I understand, Photon torps are stronger than phasers, anyway. From what I've seen in the shows, phasers are more accurate, though, and hence are used to target specific sections of an enemy ship.

SDFMacross
05-18-2000, 03:14 PM
The USS Enterprise with its phaser weapons? An Imperial Star Destroyer with its dinky lasers? Time to put away the kid's toys, gentlemen, 'cause the Japanese know how to do deep-space destruction right.
Case in point: The Super Dimension Fortress-1 Macross. according to http://macross.anime.net, the Macross (from the show Chohjikuu Yosai Macross and NOT from Robodrek) is 1200 meters long with a bow-firing energy cannon that can disintigrate anything this side of a Death Star, four 178 cm railguns, eight large beam cannons, a plethora of "large automatic anti-ship missile launchers" and, lest we forget, a compliment of upwards of 300 VF-1 Valkyries (all armed with vulcan cannons, multiple laser mounts, and tons of missile launchers) as opposed to the mere 72 TIE Fighters on the standard ISD, and the ten or so shuttlecraft on the Enterprise. Minna-sama, welcome to @$$-whup country. Oh, and I also forgot to mention that failing everything else, if it gets close enough, the Macross can actually PUNCH (yes, as in Muhammad Ali) the heck out of either of the aforementioned ships.
It's enough to make Capt. Kirk wanna go back to Iowa, eh? :D


Rick Payne

M. Christian
05-18-2000, 03:23 PM
GEEKS!

(ahem) with that out of the way, hereís my .02 of a dollar regarding this all-important debate:

I think itís paramount (sorry about that) to stop debating turbolasers vs. phasers and the like without a frame of reference. Without a solid basis of power, etc. its just apples trying to vaporize oranges.

But, I also think itís possible to get some perspective my looking at relative technologies. In this, I think youíll all agree the Federation has it hands down on the Empire. The Fed, after all, has replicators, transporters, matter/antimatter reactors, cloaking technology, and mo-fo tough shields. In fact, the only place where Wars seems to have it over Trek is in AI technology Ė and even this is questionable. While every mechanical whatsit in the Wars universe seems to have a (irritating personality) Data and even some of the stupider Federation Artificial Intelligences seem to be much more capable. God knows, C3PO seems barely competent to tend bar, while Data can serve a bitchiní Mai Tai.

As for Ďparanormal abilitiesí, much has been said of that unimaginative villain Vadar and his long-range choke hold. Hell, kiddies, keep in mind that the Trek Universe has more than itís fair share of very, very, very powerful critters Ė including some that could wipe out a civilization by just crossing their eyes. Troi or Spock would detect any Empire anti-social behavior and that would be it.

As for relative power, remember that it took the Wars universe a HUGE station to destroy one planet, while Picard and the old Federation always had the ability to pretty much toast anything in space. Looking at size vs. firepower, once again the Feds win hands down.

Now, please, get on with your lives Ė or at least more important debates Ö such as the Dominion vs. the Borg, the Borg vs. the Empire, or the crew from Futurama vs. Space Ghost.

SDFMacross
05-18-2000, 03:23 PM
The USS Enterprise with its phaser weapons? An Imperial Star Destroyer with its dinky lasers? Time to put away the kid's toys, gentlemen, 'cause the Japanese know how to do deep-space destruction right.
Case in point: The Super Dimension Fortress-1 Macross. according to http://macross.anime.net, the Macross (from the show Chohjikuu Yosai Macross and NOT from Robodrek) is 1200 meters long with a bow-firing energy cannon that can disintigrate anything this side of a Death Star, four 178 cm railguns, eight large beam cannons, a plethora of "large automatic anti-ship missile launchers" and, lest we forget, a compliment of upwards of 300 VF-1 Valkyries (all armed with vulcan cannons, multiple laser mounts, and tons of missile launchers) as opposed to the mere 72 TIE Fighters on the standard ISD, and the ten or so shuttlecraft on the Enterprise. Minna-sama, welcome to @$$-whup country. Oh, and I also forgot to mention that failing everything else, if it gets close enough, the Macross can actually PUNCH (yes, as in Muhammad Ali) the heck out of either of the aforementioned ships.
It's enough to make Capt. Kirk wanna go back to Iowa, eh? :D


Rick Payne

M. Christian
05-18-2000, 03:29 PM
GEEKS!

(ahem) with that out of the way, hereís my .02 of a dollar regarding this all-important debate:

I think itís paramount (sorry about that) to stop debating turbolasers vs. phasers and the like without a frame of reference. Without a solid basis of power, etc. its just apples trying to vaporize oranges.

But, I also think itís possible to get some perspective by looking at relative technologies. In this, I think youíll all agree the Federation has it hands down on the Empire. The Fed, after all, has replicators, transporters, matter/antimatter reactors, cloaking technology, and mo-fo tough shields. In fact, the only place where Wars seems to have it over Trek is in AI technology Ė and even this is questionable. While every mechanical whatsit in the Wars universe seems to have a (irritating) personality, Data and even some of the stupider Federation Artificial Intelligences seem to be much more capable. God knows, C3PO seems barely competent to tend bar, while Data can serve a bitchiní Mai Tai.

As for Ďparanormal abilitiesí, much has been said of that unimaginative villain Vadar and his long-range choke hold -- but that's all that the Wars folks seem to be able to muster. Hell, kiddies, keep in mind that the Trek Universe has more than itís fair share of very, very, very powerful critters Ė including some that could wipe out a civilization by just crossing their eyes. In the Trek camp, Troi would detect any Empire anti-social behavior and that would be it.

As for relative power, remember that it took the Wars universe a HUGE station to destroy one planet, while Picard and even the old Federation ships always had the ability to pretty much toast anything in space. Looking at size vs. firepower, once again the Feds win hands down.

Now, please, get on with your lives Ė or at least more important debates Ö such as the Dominion vs. the Borg, the Borg vs. the Empire, or the crew from Futurama vs. Space Ghost.

SPOOFE
05-18-2000, 04:36 PM
Macross, we're talking 'bout the Enterprise vs. a Star Destroyer here... I can bring up a bundle of other ships that can dish out damage in huge amounts. Anyone read the Jedi Academy trilogy by Kevin J. Anderson? They introduce a ship called the Sun Crusher which is the size of a starfighter and is capable of destroying stars. It had near-invincible armoring (they needed to throw the damn thing into a black hole to destroy it). So if you wanna talk about size/power ratios (and other ships, t'boot), can I just toss that little nipper in?

MetallicAsh
05-18-2000, 06:40 PM
(Don't ask me why I'm taking this the least bit seriously...but I think we can settle this AQAP (as quantitatively as possible))

I think the key point that has been mostly ignored in this thread was brought up by carniverousplant and reiterated by M. Christian, using a common reference point to determine weapons firepower.
Specifically, presuming planets are roughly the same in both reference frames, Trek ships are much more powerful. I believe it has been well established that a Trek ship can destroy an entire world (wasn't the evil Kirk from the mirror universe supposed to destroy a planet on on old episode...I haven't watched in years), while Star Wars folks made a big deal out of the fact that the Empire had a planet-killer weapon. I think it is safe to say that Star Trek weapons are orders of magnitude stronger than Star Wars weapons.

If this isn't enough to make the fight conclusive, we can also infer that the shields are roughly proportional to the strentgh of the weapons, since (order of magnitude) Trek ships and Wars ships can sustain a number of hits from their own genre's weapons before the pyrotechnics begin.

If we really want to dissect this, we can analyze comparative advantages in key technologies, but if firepower and defenses are conclusive, I don't see where the Wars ships are going to make up the deficit.

tracer
05-18-2000, 08:18 PM
SPOOFE Bo Diddly wrote:

Macross, we're talking 'bout the Enterprise vs. a Star Destroyer here...

Yeah! And besides, neither the weapons nor the Varitech fighters of the Superdimension Fortress Macross can hit anything moving faster-than-light. :p

tracer
05-18-2000, 08:31 PM
MetallicAsh wrote:

I believe it has been well established that a Trek ship can destroy an entire world (wasn't the evil Kirk from the mirror universe supposed to destroy a planet on on old episode...I haven't watched in years), while Star Wars folks made a big deal out of the fact that the Empire had a planet-killer weapon. I think it is safe to say that Star Trek weapons are orders of magnitude stronger than Star Wars weapons.

However, when a ship "destroys a planet" in a Star Trek episode, it usually just destroys the surface of the planet to wipe out anybody living thereon and make it uninhabitable by future settlers.

When the Death Star destroyed Alderaan in Star Wars, it blew up the whole planet -- crust, mantle, core, and all. This requires a far bigger bang than is required for merely razing the surface. In fact, it would require millions or even billions of times more energy.

And what's scariest about this, if Han Solo is to be believed, is that it would only take 1000 ships (presumably star-destroyer-sized ships) to do the same amount of damage. If it takes, say, 10,000,000 times more energy than the Enterprise can dish out to completely obliterate an entire planet, but it only requires 1000 Star Destroyers to accomplish this feat, then that would mean that a single Star Destroyer packs 10,000 times the whallop of the Enterprise!

SPOOFE
05-18-2000, 09:00 PM
Man, Tracer, you took the words right out of my mouth. There's a big difference between scorching the surface of a planet and shattering the thing into itty-bitty pieces. It's been explained (through the numerous novels, such as the Thrawn trilogy by Timothy Zahn, that an Imperial Star Destroyer can do the same thing to a planetary surface. Heck, humanity can currently do that to Earth (based on the estimated number of nuclear weapons and the average strength of each one).

So from this we can judge that Turbolasers and phasers are approximately equal in power, using this basis of comparison.

Further, we can specualate the shield-strength/size of ship ratio is roughly the same, which would give the Enterprise roughly the same amount of shield strength of a medium-sized cruiser. Since the Enterprise also takes damage from the "feedback" of the energy that its shields absorb, it can be speculated that a volley or two of turbolaser/ion cannons would be capable of disabling the Enterprise.

Based on the different natures of the crew, I think it's a very very likely bet that the Star Destroyer would open fire first (in a counter brought about by pure chance, no foreknowledge involved). Which leaves the Enterprise with the only obvious advantages being its sublight speed and maneuverability and its numerous non-combative, unorthodox tactics.

tracer
05-18-2000, 09:37 PM
Spoofe wrote:

Since the Enterprise also takes damage from the "feedback" of the energy that its shields absorb,

Ah, but this "feedback" only seems to affect bridge consoles. That's the only parts of the ship you ever see explode when their shields are up. (You'd think Star Fleet's engineers would know enough not to wire firecrackers to their computer consoles by now!)

SPOOFE
05-18-2000, 11:39 PM
But..... the bridge is the only part of the ship we ever see. Well, unless one of the main characters is somewhere else. Or if you count the exterior shots of the ship.

Here's a good rule of thumb for Star Trek dudes.... if a camera is pointed at you, get away from a computer screen, consol, wiring, or anything else that can emit a shower of sparks.

Karellen
05-19-2000, 06:40 AM
First of all, Iíd like to point out two things:

1) This is the longest thread in the Straight Dope GD Forums. Thatís pathetic.
2) Iíve been lurking in SD Forums for six months and this thread is the one that finally drove me to register. Iím pathetic.

We need to dismiss the dramatic tendencies of the scriptwriters as much as possible. An earlier post noticed that the Enterprise frequently sustained damage but survived, but that Star Destroyers were either menacingly intact or blowing up like fireworks. Thatís because ST is TV and SW is a movie. With TV you need damage to create drama, but survival for the next episode. In a movie, things can be final and irreversible, especially if there is more than one ship to go around.

From a pure tech viewpoint (and I must say that reading the contents of this thread had educated me beyond belief, beyond what I would ever admit to anyone) the ST universe seems more advanced in that they have managed to create peace. Itís a fallacy, albeit an easy one to make, that the wartime machinery of SW is superior because it bristles with guns and smoke-colored blaster scars. But in reality (a term I hesitate to use) itís the weapons that create dťtente that are most powerful. Case in point: nuclear weapons here in the real world have ensured no super-wars between superpowers.

Similarly, the gentle diplomatic policy of the Federation should be interpreted as a result (at least partially) of having created phenomenal technology. Along with transporters, replicators, holodecks, uniforms that donít stain or wrinkle, free love, and non-surgical medicine that cures everything, the Federation has created massive, massive weapons. Ones which create peace.

Star Wars is about rough, gritty combat with weapons that are impressive by our standards but still not advanced enough to assure the annihilation of those who use them. That the Empire is still trying to develop weaponry at all betrays the insufficiency of those weapons. The SW movies are a metaphor of the grueleing necessity of fighting in the face of tyranny, whereas the ST shows are more about the rewards of sustained diplomacy. Itís a more advanced vision, and necessitates more advanced technology. The bloodless pansy-ass violence of the series may lure us into thinking that theyíre wussies, but thatís myopic. Picard is nice because he can be. Vadar is a Nazi because he has to be.

And really, in the history of warfare size has always taken a back seat to range, just as ferocity takes a back seat to strategy. Enterprise would detect the SD from a million miles away, Picard would hail, Vader would threaten, Deanna would confirm, Worf would detect a power-up, Data would warn that the SD weapons were crude but nasty. Plenty of time to leave, or launch torpedoes, from a million miles away.

That said, I prefer a good SW movie to a ST episode, because violence is more entertaining.

A final note: Never mind the surface controls on SW fighters or the speed differential on warp-speed weapons. Since when is there NOISE in space? Or fiery explosions in a vacuum?

Love this thread, love it!

Funkster
05-19-2000, 07:27 AM
Oh, you kids.

The Enterprise would pound the crap out of the ISD, and I'll tell you why: in the Star Trek universe, starship battles invariably happen at warp speeds, but in Star Wars it's all much slower than C.

FTL travel in the Star Wars universe is a Big Deal. To travel at FTL speeds, you have to drop out of normal space and into "hyperspace", where you are flying blind with respect to real space. And one doesn't just pop in and out of hyperspace at will. HAN SOLO: Traveling through hyperspace isn't like dusting crops, boy! Without precise calculations we could fly right through a star or bounce too close to a supernova and that'd end your trip real quick, wouldn't it?

Compare that to Star Trek, where you can travel at warp speeds and still see your way around in normal space. And you can even fire your weapons while in warp.

Also, the weapons in Star Wars all travel far slower than light (with the possible exception of the big, difficult-to-aim and slow-to-fire Death Star planet 'sploder ray). Star Trek's photon torpedoes appear to be slow, dumb-fire weapons, but (depending on the season and the mood of the SFX guy) phasers generally travel instantaneously.

So. In my opinion, the Enterprise would stay at warp 1 or above, and make phaser strafing runs on the ISD until either the ISD dropped into hyperspace (run home to momma, boys!) or blowed up real good. The ISD wouldn't be able to dodge because phasers travel faster than light. All it could do is fill the air with turbolaser shot and hope it got in a lucky shot.

In closing, I'd to say this is the geekiest thing I've written in weeks, so I'm going to go listen to the P-funk until I feel more centered.

SPOOFE
05-19-2000, 04:15 PM
Star Trek battles happen at the speed of light? I've never seen this happen. I admit I haven't seen ALL of the Star Trek episodes out there, but I've seen at least 85% or so.

And the reason Hyperspace is "flying blind" would probably be because it's a LO-O-O-O-OT faster than Warp. Whereas it takes Voyager 75 years (estimated, from season 1) to cross 70,000 lightyears of distance, a Star Destroyer would be able to cross their galaxy (which, in Star Wars' case, is 150,000 lightyears in diameter) in under a month (again, that's estimated, based on other travel arrangements mentioned in sourcebooks and novels).

The essential problem with firing from Warp is that after only a few seconds, the Enterprise would be out of range (even with the amazingly excellent range that its' weapons have). So they'd be zipping back and forth, taking a potshot here and there, which wouldn't be nearly sufficient to take out the ISD. The larger ship would probably realize the futility of staying to fight after only a few passes of the E, and they'd just leave and blow up a Federation science station or Ferengi ship or something.

And even if the Enterprise used hit-and-run tactics (going to warp to reach a safe distance, dropping out of warp to fire, going to warp again, repeat), they'd still need to perform this maneuver precisely several dozen times to have any effect. With the massive amounts of weaponry that the Star Destroyer has, all it needs is a single good hyperspace jump, a single tractor beam locked-on, and a few volleys from its' guns.

As for the Han Solo quote... the danger he was talking about was directed at long-distance travel (hundreds or thousands of lightyears), not a few hundred-thousand or million kilometers. In "The Corellian Trilogy" Book I, an NRI agent (in a very dilapidated freighter, not a top-notch military starship) performed a microjump of a few hundred thousand kilometers. Her ship would have survived well enough if it, coincidentally, hadn't been designed to fail after a single hyperspace jump (it was part of her alibi to sneak onto the planet Corellia).

I like Tracer's (was it Tracer's?) long-previous idea of both ships going into the battle prepared, with a chosen battlefield and all that. The E's best chance would be finding a good planet and play hit-and-run tactics there, popping up over the horizon and disappearing again. Heck, even an asteroid field would work.

tracer
05-19-2000, 05:30 PM
Karellen wrote:

1) This is the longest thread in the Straight Dope GD Forums. Thatís pathetic.
2) Iíve been lurking in SD Forums for six months and this thread is the one that finally drove me to register. Iím pathetic.

And

3) You registered with a username of Karellen, the leader of the Overlords in Arthur C. Clarke's Childhood's End. That's pathetic. ;)

tracer
05-19-2000, 05:53 PM
Spoofe wrote:

And the reason Hyperspace is "flying blind" would probably be because it's a LO-O-O-O-OT faster than Warp. Whereas it takes Voyager 75 years (estimated, from season 1) to cross 70,000 lightyears of distance, a Star Destroyer would be able to cross their galaxy (which, in Star Wars' case, is 150,000 lightyears in diameter) in under a month (again, that's estimated, based on other travel arrangements mentioned in sourcebooks and novels).

In Dark Force Rising, the Kimura (a Star Destroyer) made a 350-light-year journey in 5 days. This works out to 25,000 times the speed of light. And that was a sustained cruising speed -- the Kimura could probably travel much faster over short distances, if you wanted to chance overloading the hyperdrive.

The essential problem with firing from Warp is that after only a few seconds, the Enterprise would be out of range (even with the amazingly excellent range that its' weapons have).

Not if it flew around the Star Destroyer in circles! (In the unofficial Trek wargame Star Fleet Battles, a starship going twice the speed of light can turn in a 20,000 kilometer radius -- but this game is notorious for its compressed time scale. Such a short turning radius at 2x lightspeed would allow you to make a complete circle 5 times per second!)

Oh -- and if the Enterprise were circling the Star Destroyer at warp speed, it could make tiny random changes in its course as it went, thus preventing the Star Destroyer from predicting where to point their guns.

GreyGriffin
05-19-2000, 07:19 PM
Hello Folks.

Before I get into this argu--erm, ahem--debate, I'd like to make it clear that I am heavily in favor of the Star Wars genre Imperial Star Destroyer winning this battle for several reasons...

A: The "Phasers and Torps at Warp Speed" theory is complete and total bunk. If that was the way it worked, why didn't they blow the smack out of the Borg Sphere in Star Trek: First Contact?

B: Where the Enterprise has one "security officer" (aka Worf) to direct the fire of weaponry, the ISD has a bridge crew numbering into the several score (exact numbers, I don't know), each responsible for a different system. This enables the ISD to target several key points on the Enterprise (Namely, those wussy little posts that hold the Warp Nacelles on) AND keep the whole ship running at tip-top shape. Additionally, the Imperial Star Destroyer has a full 360 degree firing arc.

C: The ISD's shields are much, much stronger than you people are making out. You've all seen the movies, right? Ever wonder what those frames with those mysterious white flashes were? You guessed it...weaponry being absorbed or deflected. Ever wonder, in Return of the Jedi, why that crashing A-wing that careened into the Mon Calamari Cruiser didn't destroy it, or why that purpley funnel of an explosion didn't quite touch the hull? Shields.

D: The range of weaponry is a completely moot point, especially since the only available statistics are from unofficial sources (I believe, this may be a refutable point) but, as has been pointed out, precision use of hyperspacing and micro-jumps could easily level the field.

On a more technical note...I propose this...was it a movie or an episode where Geordie (forgive the misspelling) was captured by some Klingon ladies...and they bugged his visor. They were all keen about finding the frequency of the shields, and once they recalibrated the shields to that frequency (or oscillation, or whatever the hell) the phasers went right through. That implies that phasers are nothing more than the same sort of energy as force fields...maybe they're just pointy force fields? That would explain why the wounds on the hulls of the Star Trek ships look like slashes, rather than craters or just chunks ripped off.

Well, that's my $.02. Thanks for your time.

GreyGriffin
05-19-2000, 07:22 PM
Hello Folks.

Before I get into this argu--erm, ahem--debate, I'd like to make it clear that I am heavily in favor of the Star Wars genre Imperial Star Destroyer winning this battle for several reasons...

A: The "Phasers and Torps at Warp Speed" theory is complete and total bunk. If that was the way it worked, why didn't they blow the smack out of the Borg Sphere in Star Trek: First Contact?

B: Where the Enterprise has one "security officer" (aka Worf) to direct the fire of weaponry, the ISD has a bridge crew numbering into the several score (exact numbers, I don't know), each responsible for a different system. This enables the ISD to target several key points on the Enterprise (Namely, those wussy little posts that hold the Warp Nacelles on) AND keep the whole ship running at tip-top shape. Additionally, the Imperial Star Destroyer has a full 360 degree firing arc.

C: The ISD's shields are much, much stronger than you people are making out. You've all seen the movies, right? Ever wonder what those frames with those mysterious white flashes were? You guessed it...weaponry being absorbed or deflected. Ever wonder, in Return of the Jedi, why that crashing A-wing that careened into the Mon Calamari Cruiser didn't destroy it, or why that purpley funnel of an explosion didn't quite touch the hull? Shields.

D: The range of weaponry is a completely moot point, especially since the only available statistics are from unofficial sources (I believe, this may be a refutable point) but, as has been pointed out, precision use of hyperspacing and micro-jumps could easily level the field.

On a more technical note...I propose this...was it a movie or an episode where Geordie (forgive the misspelling) was captured by some Klingon ladies...and they bugged his visor. They were all keen about finding the frequency of the shields, and once they recalibrated the shields to that frequency (or oscillation, or whatever the hell) the phasers went right through. That implies that phasers are nothing more than the same sort of energy as force fields...maybe they're just pointy force fields? That would explain why the wounds on the hulls of the Star Trek ships look like slashes, rather than craters or just chunks ripped off.

Well, that's my $.02. Thanks for your time.

Monster104
05-19-2000, 10:32 PM
Well, the info given for either universe may come from unofficial source books, but those books are officially recognized by each universe's respective creators.

Photon torpedoes have basically been proven to fly at FTL speeds, while phasers don't.

Karellen (Or whatever your name is) Weapons developed during peace time are NEVER as powerful as ones developed during conflict. For example...nuclear bombs were developed during war time, wheras during peace we've made, what...the F-22? Sure, it may be an advanced fighter jet, but can pack nowhere near the damage of a single nuclear weapon. The only good machinery developed during peace time are just improvements of older machinery, with very few if any new components, just refinements. In SW, each side is constantly developing new weapons to extinguish the other side (well, that's the Empire's tactic anyways). So since in ST they just refine current technology, it is presumable that in SW more powerful and devastating weaponry has been developed (ie Sun Crusher).

And everyone still forgets the chaos ion cannons would wreak on the Enterprise with just a few blasts (I mean, come on...in books it describes X-wings and small capital ships being reduced to fused metal and circuits with a blast or two)

Anyways, I may be wrong (completely or partially, I dunno) about some of this, but we do have some theoretical facts going in this thread (But hey, it's all make believe)

Higgybaby
05-20-2000, 07:32 AM
I'm with the Vader chokes Jean Luc with the force-and Vader does the dumb Priceline commercials crowd

Initial Entry
05-20-2000, 09:38 AM
Er, we are talking about a battle between starships of similar size, one with more firepower, and the other with the ability to engage in combat in superluminal speeds with weapons that travel at superluminal speeds, right?

What makes anyone think that the Star Destroyer would ever even hit the Enterprise? It can't see the Enterprise-since it is travelling faster than the speed of light any image they recieved would be hopelessly "behind" where the Enterprise was when they recieved the image. The Enterprise doesn't need to ever drop out of warp-it can fire at warp, and has good enough sensors to know of the sensory capabilities of the Star Destroyer. While microjumps are neat, they wouldn't help unless the Enterprise decided to drop out of warp, which they have no real reason to do.

All in all, it really doesn't matter how powerful the Star Destroyer was, you can't fight what you can't see, let alone hit.

tracer
05-20-2000, 02:00 PM
Monster104 wrote:

Weapons developed during peace time are NEVER as powerful as ones developed during conflict. For example...nuclear bombs were developed during war time, wheras during peace we've made, what...the F-22?

Um, the hydrogen bomb developed in 1956 was about 1000 times more powerful than the nukes we developed during World War 2.

tracer
05-20-2000, 02:22 PM
GreyGriffin wrote:

A: The "Phasers and Torps at Warp Speed" theory is complete and total bunk. If that was the way it worked, why didn't they blow the smack out of the Borg Sphere in Star Trek: First Contact?

But they did blow the smack out of the Borg Sphere in Star Trek: First Contact. They just waited until it started firing at the surface of 21st century Earth before they did so.

GreyGriffin
05-20-2000, 04:57 PM
However, the Enterprise and the Borg Cube were NOT travelling faster than light when they started firing...otherwise the earth would have smacked them in the face (they were close enough to establish low orbit and heading straight at it.) They didn't fire on the Borg Sphere (which, since they were trying to defend the Sol system from the Borg, they should have had no hesitation with blowing to smack) because they would have had to drop to Impulse speeds, thus losing the Sphere, until it reached Earth and started that time thingy...during which the Enterprise would have been torn in half if they'd blown up the sphere and ended the process...

So, they get through the temporal doohickey and THEN they blow up the Sphere (one problem Tachyons can't solve for them! Mwu hu ha ha ha!)

SPOOFE
05-20-2000, 06:29 PM
The "Enterprise attacking from warp" bit... I hate asking for a cite in a thread like this (like Monster said, it's all make-believe and all the "sources" are make-believe... and rather inconsistent, t'boot), but has there been an episode where the Enterprise went to warp to attack a target that wasn't in warp? I asked this earlier in the thread, but didn't get any answer, and I myself have never heard of that tactic used in any show/movie/novel/source other than in this thread.

What makes anyone think that the Star Destroyer would ever even hit the Enterprise?

The Enterprise isn't ALWAYS in Warp. Warp travel in Star Trek requires tremendous amounts of energy to maintain the warp field (in Star Wars, traveling in hyperspace requires negligible amounts of fuel). And the Enterprise wouldn't GO to warp unless there was some sort of threat that it wouldn't be able to overcome. However, my theory is that, in a chance encounter, the Star Destroyer would be likely to open fire first (with no provocation, mind you), and this initial volley would disable or destroy the Enterprise. Or the Star Destroyer's eight tractor beam projectors can lock the thing in place.

Oh... and the Enterprise (we're talking about the Enterprise-D here, not the Enteprise-E) is about 650 meters long... an Imperial-class Star Destroyer is 1600 meters long. Just wanted to clarify.

Initial Entry
05-20-2000, 06:29 PM
See, the problem with that is that wouldn't have had to drop to impulse to fire. Plenty of episodes have shown them firing all variety of weapons while travelling at warp. Either you misunderstood what was happening, or they just needed a reason why the Enterprise couldn't fire then and that was all they were able to come up with and didn't really care that the rest of the Star Trek shows, tech manuals, etc disagreed with them.

Personally I'm leaning toward the second option, First Contact was crap, I mean if they were going to radically redesign the Borg, why not the laws of physics as well?

SPOOFE
05-20-2000, 06:36 PM
Plenty of episodes have shown them firing all variety of weapons while travelling at warp.

I know they can fire weapons while in warp. I've seen it happen, too, but only when they were firing at something else that was ALSO in warp. What I want to know is, has the Enterprise ever encountered a hostile ship that couldn't go to warp, and gone to warp themselves to attack it?

Another flaw with that theory is that the Federation has very strict "peace" principles in place (the Prime Directive, for example). Going to Warp to attack a non-warp-capable target would probably be seen as "unfair" and/or "excessive"... and by the time the crew would decide that they'd NEED to go to warp, it'd be too late.

Initial Entry
05-20-2000, 06:40 PM
he Star Destroyer would be likely to open fire first (with no provocation, mind you),

This is something I'm not really convinced of actually...I know they're evil, but I doubt that the Empire would just randomly fire on unknown vessels.

On the issue of fighting at warp: the reason that you don't see many battles between one vessel at warp and one not at warp is that in Star Trek there really aren't too many ships worth fighting that don't have warp drives. The Picard Manouver comes to mind though.

And on the fairness issue, when faced with an ISD, you use what you can. I doubt that it would be considered too cowardly to stay out of the way of that much weaponry. (A probably situation would probably involve the Enterprise doing a few flyovers, then backing way off and trying to negotiate a bit..)

soulsling
05-20-2000, 07:43 PM
hey, i'm back, and so it seems is this thread.
and where did all the damn newbies to this thread come from?
with their 2 cents i might add.
geez, well, back on the original topic.

this is The Enterprise vs. The Imperial Star Destroyer
not Macross, Not the Borg, not the smurfs, or the lion, witch, and her god damned wardrobe. stick to it kids.
i was toasty and done a long time ago, but they've peaked my interest again.

sorry for my interjection of BBQ pit type analysis on the goings on in here,

carry on...

i'll by sipping my tea, earl grey, hot.

SPOOFE
05-20-2000, 11:07 PM
Soulsling... THANK you...

And on the fairness issue, when faced with an ISD, you use what you can.

Well, look at it this way... the Enterprise comes across this big ol' ship... they don't detect a Warp drive, they don't detect any phasers, they don't detect impulse engines, none of the stuff that they're used to. They assume it's just a big, clunky ship. They open a comm channel (I think we can assume that the two ships would be able to communicate).

Now, over on the Star Destroyer... they see this lil' ship, moving pretty damn fast, they've never seen anything like it before. The captain wants to bring glory to his Emperor, so he decides to disable the thing (a Star Destroyer has 40 ion cannons, after all... or 60, depending on which source book you read). All of a sudden, he gets a transmission from the captain of the Enterprise, who says he wants to be friends. With a grin, the captain of the Star Destroyer plays along, gets in close... then orders the tractor beams to lock on and orders all guns to open fire. A few volleys of turbolaser fire bring down the shields, and then ion cannons fry the circuits of the ship.

I know that there's a lot of other scenarios possible, but that's the one that I figure is most likely in a chance encounter brought about by some unknown random fiction-splicification wormportal thing.

Initial Entry
05-20-2000, 11:37 PM
Well, A) the Enterprise would also be able to detect the weaponry on the ISD, and the fact that it was powering up to fire-and would hence, knowing that the ISD wasn't capable of superluminal manuovering, probably be in warp long before the ISD was able to start firing. Also,
and then ion cannons fry the circuits of the ship.
Now, you'll want to double check this, as I no longer have a tech manual, but as best I recall the Enterprise doesn't have circuitry, they have plasma conduits, and other fancy whatzits, but not circuitry. An Ion cannon might do something, but not anything as dramatic as that, and in any case, they probably wouldn't have the opportunity to use it anyway.

psiflare
05-21-2000, 01:26 AM
oh goodness, i just spent the better part of my evening reading this entire thread. scary, non?

anyway, my take on the matter, as someone with a much better understanding of the trek universe versus sw.

commenting on a far ancient question, there ~are~ federation marines, complete with armor and everything. i remember some ds9 (i think) ep where one died or something. however, these wouldn't be on the ent. and my opinion is that storm troopers would probably whoop the fed if they were boarded, unless the ent. put up some containment fields which isn't so far fetched.

however, i seriously doubt "hand-to-hand" combat would become an issue. imho, the isd possesses sufficient firepower to give the ent a real beating at close range, especially with all its tie fighters etc. however, any microjump would separate the tie fighters from the isd, keep in mind. either way, my opinion is that the ent would need to implement spread-fire (possibly homing?) photon torpedoes or phaser fire, both of which exist, esp. against ties but also against the isd itself. my opinion is that both possess sufficient power to severely damage the isd, although they do seem to be able to take quite a beating.

the warp-by shooting idea seems plausible, but i highly doubt the ent. crew would implement it. it's not something i've ever seen in the st universe (albeit there's way much of it i haven't seen). the transport-the-bomb-onto-the-isd is also lame and non trek-like, imho. same thing with shuttlecraft.

long range photorp fire seems the most likely scenario, because surely the ent would have detected the weapons capabilities at long range. i'm somewhat curious, tho, if adding warp capability to a photorp decreases the available space for explosives, which i suspect it does, but even so, i'm still not sure if warp-photorps would be necessary. ...and also perhaps something nifty could be done to the deflector dish as well to be weapon-ified.

on the subject of torpedoes, if a proton torpedo bombards with high energy protons, couldn't a resourceful officer merely zap it with some electricity and turn it into hydrogen?

also i concur w/ initial about the optronic computers. i seriously doubt the ion cannon would have significant effect of the ent's systems.

to comment on spoofe's separation plot -- this is usually only done in extremely dire conditions, because of the aforementioned weakness of each part alone.

however, i very much realize the good chance of the crew being held offguard if the isd fires first with little warning, which could feasibly disable several internal systems. however, this depends on the success of long range scans and communications. success also seems dependent on some sort of brief planning/regrouping stage for the ent, which may be before any encounter, or after an initial retreat.

none of this is to say the ent would win, either. i haven't decided on that.

now the defiant. that would be cool to see against an isd... (loves those megaphasers)

ok enough from me.

-psiflare

fnord1966
05-21-2000, 01:55 AM
why not just dump the warp core after overloading it, use pod thrusters to aim it over to the ISD, then detonate, if a single warp core can seal a subspace rift, its sure to have enough power to blow up a measly star destroyer, oh sure you say, but then the enterprise would be powerless against the remaining tie fighters, well now, dosent the enterprise carry a spare warp core? i seem to remember a movie or episode when mr laforge just slapped a new one in and continued to whoop ass. personally, the white star4 from Babalyon 5 would kick all their asses, or a shadow ship or a vorlon ship, but hey who am i to say?

Monster104
05-21-2000, 02:25 AM
First, I agree with SPOOFE that there is no evidence that the Enterprise can fire from warp at targets not in warp. It's never been done or even mentioned before now, so it presumable it can't be done.

Second...this may be a little confusing (my thought process is usually very random), but I don't think the entire ship can run via plasma conduits. Plasma conduits would be a good way to provide power to things like warp nacelles, phaser arrays, and transporters since they would theoretically be able to provide so much power...but why would they run plasma conduits to computers or display monitors that would require relatively very little energy? Another thing...would plasma conduits emit showers of sparks when damaged, or would they make a huge explosion? If they do emit showers of sparks, that means they are transferring electricity along some type of circuitry, which would mean the Enterprise would be affected by ion cannons.

Third...I know this one may not make sense either, but here goes...ISD's always have weapons armed and ready for combat...so if their weapons are ALREADY charged and ready to attack, the Enterprise would not be able to detect any type of warning power-ups. The Enterprise would detect power coursing through the ship constantly, and possibly assume that although the ship is large, it is outdated and harmless, and would therefore attempt to communicate and establish friendly relations which would then leave them vulnerable to a surprise attack by already-charged and ready weapons and tractor beams (which it has 10 of, not 8).

One last thing...tracer, about the hydrogen bomb...although it uses the exact opposite type of reaction than the atom bomb, it's merely a refinement of nuclear technology of the time. Although it is considered an innovation in the use of technology, it did not really create new technology (aside from the bomb itself as a whole being considered new technology). With that being said, I still stand by my statement that new technology developed during war is more powerful than new technology developed during peace time.

Ator
05-21-2000, 02:28 AM
The reason that the future Enterprise can go Warp 13 is because warp speeds are a function of a recursive asymptote (not sure if this is correct terminology). A ship that closes in on Warp 10, will jump into Transwarp. In which case, the ship will go really fast, until, thereotically, it reaches the upward limit of Transwarp, and jumps into Trans-Transwarp, and so on ad infinitum. This allows for an infinite range of speeds, without ever reaching infinite mass. Warp 13, would then be, I guess, an extrapolation from the other warp speeds. I assume this is also how you go to Warp. You would accelerate close to the speed of light, and jump to Warp. The formula for velocity addition is an asymptote, as I believe Cecil wrote in one of his columns, and is an example that it's impossible to ever reach the speed of light, but why can't you shift into another dimension if you go fast enough? The reason the Borg were able to get into the Alpha Quadrant so quickly from the Delta quadrant was because they had Transwarp capability, which the Federation does not, at least in the Trek present, although Voyager was able to use a stolen Transwarp coil until it burned it out. I got this information from the CD-Rom Version of the Star Trek Encyclopedia.

Target
05-21-2000, 04:36 AM
This discussion has been very interesting, though I feel the need to inject a few facts that seem to have been missed.

ST shields block everything, even ions and the energy byproducts of such electrically charged particles. Unless I'm missing something, this would mean that ion cannons would be innefective so long as the shields are up.

At least in the ST universe, a ship cannot be tractored while its shields are up. Those same energy, matter and kitchen-sink-blocking shields at work again.

Those segmented phasers are capable of VERY rapid firing, as well as sustained (beam) firing. The enterprise freeing itself from the borg cube's tractor beam is one example. I might also add that this same scene is an example of those shields in action. The borg cube could not grab the enterprise in a tractor beam until it had "adapated" and broken through their shields. This is also why federals rotate shield harmonics so often nowadays. :)

I like a good debate as much as the next guy, but I keep seeing people on both sides conveniently ignoring, misrepresenting or just plain dismissing (this is law, 'cause I've made an arbitrary decision based on a biased collection of data... so never bring it up again!) important information. That last one is downright offensive, and again it's happening on both sides. Cut that out. :-P

SPOOFE
05-21-2000, 05:23 AM
ST shields block everything, even ions and the energy byproducts of such electrically charged particles.

Yeah, they block everything... I, for one, never said otherwise. However, they seem to be pretty unstable, since during battles they get a good hit, you see a computer terminal explode, a random crewman gets knocked unconsciouse... then you hear Worf yell, "Shields down to 60%!" Seems that the shields take a little feedback from damage.

For the Star Destroyer, you've got to get all the way through a section of the shield to the hull in order to begin damaging it.

Based on this information about the E's shields, I'd imagine that the feedback from a hundred or so really-powerful cannons pounding against the shield would cause some dire consequences.

Now to addres Initial Entry's two points...

First, Rules of Engagement: The Federation has standards of "Ethical Combat" in place, really strict standards, too. To wit, there are just some things you don't do. You don't bring excessive force to the battlefield, you never fire unless fired upon, things like this.

Think the Fed's ethics are bunk? Check this out... in the Next Generation episode that first introduced us to Hugh the Borg, Geordi came across a technique to kill all borg everywhere, instantly. Pretty simple process, too. But they decided not to implement it. Why? 'Cuz it was unethical. So, with that in mind, does it really seem that unlikely that the E wouldn't immediately use a tactic that gives them a huge advantage over an unknown adversary? I mean, it's a good tactic... but with their "Ethical Combat" rules in place, they'd only use it for a last resort... that is, they'd try other tactics first, tactics which probably wouldn't work. By the time the E went to warp... boom.

Now, the plasma conduits... are you sure that they're the only means of transmitting power through the ship? I mean, a stream of plasma not only sounds difficult to achieve on teeny-tiny scales, it sounds REALLY dangerous, t'boot.

Ion cannons eliminate any form of electrical charge in its target... it's really late, and I don't want to go check the sourcebooks in my room, since I'll wake everyone up, so I don't know the exact mechanics to it (I'll get the cite tomorrow), but I'd imagine that they combine electrons to existing electrical charges, thus rendering them neutral. So it's not just electrical circuits, it's EVERYTHING that carries an electric charge... and plasma (unless a plasma conduit carries blood plasma? Yeah, right...) is essentially a super-charged gas.

Now for Fnord's tactic... that would actually be pretty damn feasible, and I can imagine them doing it in our Scenario B (which is the scenario where both ships have prior knowledge of the other, and are able to plan accordingly). Dumping the warp core takes a bit to accomplish, and when you've just been surprised by an alien ship, dumping the core is the last thing on your mind (unless there's a core breach). So that's another of the tactics to list under scenario B (which provides a larger number of possibilities).

Here's a thought... to make things easier, howzabout everyone refer to which scenario they're talking about when you're posting? That way, all assumptions would be able to be molded to that particular chain of events. Scenario A is a random encounter, with no knowledge of each other beforehand, and Scenario B is where both ships have been given a good piece (though not intimate) knowledge of their adversary.

Whew! That's a long post. I rant a lot at 2:00 AM.

tracer
05-21-2000, 11:19 AM
Ator wrote:

The reason that the future Enterprise can go Warp 13 is because warp speeds are a function of a recursive asymptote (not sure if this is correct terminology). A ship that closes in on Warp 10, will jump into Transwarp. In which case, the ship will go really fast, until, thereotically, it reaches the upward limit of Transwarp, and jumps into Trans-Transwarp, and so on ad infinitum. This allows for an infinite range of speeds, without ever reaching infinite mass. Warp 13, would then be, I guess, an extrapolation from the other warp speeds.

You must've missed the Warp Speed Formula discussion in the official Star Trek: The Next Generation Technical Manual. It's on page 55.

In this standardized formula, warp speed X is X^3.33333 times the speed of light, up to warp 9. Beyond warp 9, warp speed asymptotically approaches warp 10. "Warp 10" is only a theoretical "speed" -- an object travelling at warp 10 is moving infinitely fast. Crossing the "Transwarp Threshold", as mentioned in the Star Trek: Voyager episode "Threshold", refers to a ship achieving warp 10 and, thus, travelling infinitely fast. (Since the universe is curved, an infinitely fast object passes through all points in the universe at once.) There is no "upper limit of Transwarp" any more than there is an upper limit to infinity.

The canonical answer as to why the Enterprise of the future (in the ST:TNG episode "All Good Things...") could go Warp 13 is that, by the time these events take place, the old warp speed formula had become to cumbersome to describe high speeds, and was scrapped in favor of a new one. After all, in the ST:TNG Tech Manual warp speed formula, Warp 9.8 is about 3 times as fast as Warp 9.0, and Warp 9.9 is nearly twice as fast as that. If improvements in warp engine technology allow a ship to cruise at, say, warp 9.97 by this old warp-speed formula, it makes sense to re-calibrate your scale so that you don't have to keep saying "nine point nine" every time you change cruising speed.

psiflare
05-21-2000, 12:32 PM
first things first, "power transmission for onboard systems is accomplished by a network of microwave power transmission waveguides known as the electroplasma system (eps)." (st:tng tech manual) nowhere does the tech manual discuss electrical systems. from my understanding, they are all plasma conduits or these eps conduits, although since it is the _electro_plasma system, who knows. explanations for sparks when they're hit are probably a matter of fx practicality -- you can't on a regular basis have a console spewing plasma at people.

to fnord, there is no extra warp core. once you eject it, you're basically dead in the water. it's the ship's main source of energy.

and about the firing from warp at non-warp deal. i don't understand the problem here. ok, it's been established that photorps can be launched at warp speeds. assuming this, the photorp could easily just power down the warp field around it and continue at sublight speeds towards the target.

btw, each phaser segments emit 5.1 megawatts, and a saucer phaser has 200 segments = 1.02 gigawatts, and recharge time is less than 0.5 seconds, maintainable full blast for 45 minutes.

also take note of fast shield response time...also in the tech manual, it mentions shields energizing in 550 ns, noting this is just as they are shot at, and fully energize in 2000 ns.

hmm...i think that's all for now.

-psiflare

tracer
05-21-2000, 01:41 PM
psiflare wrote:

also take note of fast shield response time...also in the tech manual, it mentions shields energizing in 550 ns, noting this is just as they are shot at, and fully energize in 2000 ns.

... which is a hell of an improvement over the shield response time back in the days of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.

I mean, the Enterprise was already on yellow alert, then Kirk said, "Raise shields", then Khan yelled, "Fire!", then the phaser blast from the Reliant hit the Enterprise's engineering section while its shields were still down! Bleah.

Ator
05-21-2000, 03:41 PM
Well, I just checked the Encyclopedia. Either I was hallucinating seeing the entry, or the user interface is so cumbersome you can't find anything you're looking for. I'm almost positive I read that Transwarp was just a beyond Warp speed. But, after abandoning my search with the Encyclopedia, I did a bit of searching. The "Warp and Subspace FAQ", located at http://members.aa.net/~skeksis/Star_Trek/FAQs/warp-faq.html, states that the term "Transwarp" has never actually been nailed down. It could be Warp 10, or a speed of Warp 10 and beyond. I quote, "If X is to transwarp as subspace is to warp, then perhaps X has the same relationship to subspace that subspace has to normal space? Trans-subspace?" So, this is yet another one of those damn terms that are never nailed down.

I did find, during my search through the Encyclopedia, that the Trek universe has sort of a counterpart to the hyperdrive jumping thing in Star Wars. It's called Touch-and-Go Downwarping, when a Ship drops out of Warp for a second, and jumps back in very quickly.

The only method I can think of to solve the Star Destroyer v. Enterprise dillema, would be to completely eliminate all human involvement and get down to the actual Physics. If someone wants to hunt down the exact weapon and shield strength specs for both ships in known measurements, like Joules, we may be able to get somewhere. Let's get away from this crap about how Starfleet Regulations don't allow them to fire first.

Besides, all they need to do is beam Wesley Crusher and annoy them to death. :)

SPOOFE
05-21-2000, 03:59 PM
A plasma conduit still transfers energy, and an ion cannon blast negates said energy. It doesn't matter if the energy is being transferred through standard circuitry, plasma conduit, or by horseback... an ion cannon blast dispels electrical charges.

In Star Wars, where ion cannons are regularly-used weapons, lots of warships have "counter-measures" for ion bombardment... they're really not counter-measures per se, they're really devices that reverse polarity of transmitted charges that help in restoring power to vital systems quicker.

In Star Trek, where ion bombardment is rare (I can't recall any specific mention of ions being specifically used for weaponry), I doubt they'd have a counter for this sort of attack.

And to address the shield issue... big thanks to Psiflare for getting us even more stats for the Enterprise. As far as I know, there's no listing of how long it takes for a Star Destroyer's shields to come online/recharge... though I imagine it'd depend on how much stress has been placed on the shields (in The Bacta War, they discuss a squadron of X-wings pounding on a Star Destroyer with proton torpedoes until gaps are opened in the shields, at which point they can begin damaging the hull. However, it's mentioned that the gaps in the shields begin closing almost-instantly. Bigger gaps would take longer to close, barring a reroutement of the shield energy).

And... damn my family! (Expect me starting a thread about that in the Pit). I've searched and searched and dug through piles of crap strewn about the place, but for the life of me, I can't find either of my sourcebooks (except for the Incredible Cross-Sections book for Episode I, nothing of which really applies here). So I still can't dig around and find more stats to throw out.

Curses! ::shakes fist::

fnord1966
05-21-2000, 04:05 PM
i still say detonate a warp core by them, or if that failed, have the enterprise tow a disabled excelsior with her tractor beams, then have kirk hop on the the excelsior set the self destruct, and a colision course, and then beam off just before impact, just like in that episode with the big nasty flying destructive HORN-O-PLENTY. that would tecnically be a weapon self guided brouhgt to battle in tow. that would be enough ofthat.

SPOOFE
05-21-2000, 04:05 PM
Besides, all they need to do is beam Wesley Crusher and annoy them to death.

NO-O-O-O-O-O-O!!! Not that!!! ANYthing but that!!! We give up!! We gi-i-i-i-i-ive u-u-u-u-up!!!!

If you send us Wesley, WE'LL send you Jake Lloyd as Anakin Skywalker! HA!! Take THAT!!!!

tracer
05-21-2000, 05:13 PM
Spoofe wrote:

A plasma conduit still transfers energy, and an ion cannon blast negates said energy. It doesn't matter if the energy is being transferred through standard circuitry, plasma conduit, or by horseback... an ion cannon blast dispels electrical charges.

Ah! But! In the Star Wars universe, ion cannons aren't stopped by shields because the shields are only ray shields, and ions are charged particles! (SW has "particle shields", too, but these don't extend out beyond the physical surface of the ship like ray shields do. Source: SW Essential Guide to Weapons & Tech, page 82. Thus, while the particle shields could keep an ion cannon blast from penetrating the hull, they couldn't keep out the close-proximity electrostatic charges of the ions, which is why ion cannons are so effective in the SW universe.)

In the Star Trek universe, on the other hand, shields stop everything that isn't tuned to their magical plot-loophole frequency. This would include ion cannons. ST shields have deflected "plasma"-based attacks many times in the past, and plasmas are just made of charged particles, such as ions.

Target
05-21-2000, 05:18 PM
Wouldn't you have get the plasma out of its state (back to liquid or gas) before it stops producing charge? That plasma doesn't just carry a charge, it creates one. Assuming ion weapons could disrupt it, they would need to be in the form of several constant beams to vital areas.
As plasma is ionized itself, it would also make some sense to simply give it the same polarity the ion weapons are using.

The damage ST ships recieve through shields is from the inertia of the weapon impacts jarring the ship (inertial dampers are supposed to take care of this, but it wouldn't be very suspenseful if the ship didn't get dinged up a bit), and feedback from the shield generators (why they don't just vent this I have no idea.. maybe they actually do, but it isn't as theatrical and hence not fit for TV) as they absorb damage. Those exploding consoles, falling bulkheads&cables, and coolant leaks are for show, much the same way you always see a star destroyer either totally undamaged, or exploding into a brilliant fireball.

On the subject of the SD's microjump; ST ships have FTL sensors, so what prevents them from seeing it coming? If somehow not the movement itself, then by the powering up of the engines and the ship's heading.

I'm not sure where the idea of federation starships having eggshell armour comes from. Their outer hull is made of duranium. Ultra-dense depleted uranium.

One other thing that's bothering me is the up to 1.5kg antimatter warhead on a photon torpedo. 1.5kg antimatter means 3kg of mass converted completely to energy. Maybe I'm off my rocker, but that seems like a HELL of a lot more than 50 megatons. Even a fraction of that much atimatter seems like a hell of a bigger bang (again, for theatrics, the shows and movies sissify these weapons). Does anyone know approx how many megajoules of energy in a one megaton explosion? I don't know offhand and need that figure to do the calculations.

soulsling
05-21-2000, 11:25 PM
hi, me again,
as far as shields, i don't recall from earlier, but can the E transport through the ISD shields? i mean ray or particle, becuase if they can alter variables such as the harmonics and wave frequencies, or even find places in the shields that are weak, is it possible? IMO, i find that this is a possibility that would occur even to Riker in fairly short time, to analyze the ISD shields and determine if this can be done, in which case i can see Data and LaForge working on it. What do you think???
Also, referring back to the issue of the ISD and E opening com with each other initially, i don't know enough about SW universe type dealings with this, but isn't there a chance they would want to capture the ship alive and well, or with minimal damage so as to be able to steal the technology? Seems like that's the type of thing that would attract them, so as to be able to adapt it for their own use. Whereas the Enterprise of course will try to negotiate peacefully, but cautiously, (theyr'e not stupid).

oh, and welcome psiflare and Ator. i was obviously not including you in my BBQ Pit intervention earlier.

tracer
05-21-2000, 11:44 PM
Target wrote:

Wouldn't you have get the plasma out of its state (back to liquid or gas) before it stops producing charge? That plasma doesn't just carry a charge, it creates one.

And where are you getting this twisted version of physics from?

Rule Number 1: Charge is always conserved. Electrostatic charge can be neither created nor destroyed.

Rule Number 2: See rule number 1.

tracer
05-21-2000, 11:57 PM
One other thing that's bothering me is the up to 1.5kg antimatter warhead on a photon torpedo. 1.5kg antimatter means 3kg of mass converted completely to energy. Maybe I'm off my rocker, but that seems like a HELL of a lot more than 50 megatons. Even a fraction of that much atimatter seems like a hell of a bigger bang (again, for theatrics, the shows and movies sissify these weapons). Does anyone know approx how many megajoules of energy in a one megaton explosion? I don't know offhand and need that figure to do the calculations.

Right here, scrawled into the liner notes of my undergraduate physics text: 1 ton of TNT = either 2.6 x 10^9 Joules or 4.2 x 10^9 Joules, depending on who you talk to.

Now, by E = mc^2, 3 kg of matter and antimatter annihilating each other would produce 3 kg * (3 x 10^8 m/s)^2 = 2.7 x 10^17 Joules. If we use the first formula I listed in the previous paragraph, that's 103 megatons; if we use the second formula, it's 64 megatons.

This is slightly higher than the the earlier back-of-the-envelope estimate of 40-50 megatons, but it's still awfully close.

tracer
05-22-2000, 12:06 AM
soulsling wrote:

as far as shields, i don't recall from earlier, but can the E transport through the ISD shields? i mean ray or particle, becuase if they can alter variables such as the harmonics and wave frequencies, or even find places in the shields that are weak, is it possible?

The hypothesis I posted earlier in this thread was as follows:

Since Star Fleet's best engineers have not yet been able to concoct a shield that their ships' own transporters can operate through, the blockage of transporter beams must be a "normal" consequence of all basic shielding technology. Therefore, Star Wars ray shields should block transporters by default. (Particle shields don't project a field any distance away from the ship, and can't stop nonmassive things like laser blasts -- so they probably wouldn't work against transporters.)

However, I do remember an episode of ST:TNG where Miles O'Brien found a periodic weakness in another Star Fleet ship's shields, which allowed him to transport through it if he timed the transport properly. (This was the same episode that first introduced the Cardassians.) Given enough read-outs on a Star Destroyer's ray shields, it's possible that Geordi might be able to reverse the polarity of the neutron flow or quantum-destabilize the static warp conduit antigraviton emitters or frobnitz the ambivulent bivationary falvebarms and sneak a transporter beam through.

SPOOFE
05-22-2000, 04:04 AM
In the Star Wars universe, ion cannons aren't stopped by shields because the shields are only ray shields, and ions are charged particles!

Oh, come on, Tracer! Just about EVERYTHING is the result of a particle or two... radiation is nothing more than hurtling particles (the smaller the particle, the more dangerous the radiation), light is a bunch of photons... etc. As Dark Helmet once said... "What's with you man? Come ON!" Particle shields are designed to stop "macro" objects, while ray shields are designed to stop "micro" objects.

C'mon, guys, don't judge something by what it's named, judge it by what it does. If we were arguing based on names, then photon torpedoes would be nothing more than projectile sunburn makers.

ST ships have FTL sensors, so what prevents them from seeing it coming?

Two things would prevent them from detecting a microjump... first, and simplest, it'd be practically instantaneous. Second, our good Star Trek buddies have no knowledge of hyperspace existing. While an object is in hyperspace, other objects outside have no means of detecting it. There's no physics to back this up (hyperspace, along with subspace, are fictional tools to allow story), only brief mentions from numerous books (I believe it was in The Last Command where someone mentioned that a well-timed assault would have to be planned before jumping to hyperspace since there's no hyperspace-realspace communication, but I'll go through some of the novels and dig the exact reference... no time to do it now, though, it'd take hours).

I'm not sure where the idea of federation starships having eggshell armour comes from. Their outer hull is made of duranium.

I'll tell you where... any Federation ship completely loses hull integrity when it's structural integrity field collapses. Basically, it's got an energy field that holds the thing together. All those high-speed maneuvers (relatively) and such would tear the ship to shreds without the inegrity field.

Also, simple "eye-ball measurements". The battle section (with the nacelles and such) is connected to the saucer section by a REALLY thin structure... that "neck" thingy can't be more than several dozen meters thick. Compared to how massive the saucer section is and the rest of the battle section is, that's a really weak spot right there. Should a single turbolaser blast or two penetrate the shields and hit anywhere along that weak spot, there's gonna be trouble.

Now, to address Soulsling's shielding issue... I sincerely doubt that a transporter beam would be capable of penetrating the ISD's ray shields (particle shields would do nothing, of course). There's absolutely no mention in any novel or sourcebook that I've read of SW shields operating on a frequency basis... while I hate to dispel an idea based on lack of evidence, this whole argument doesn't really have a firm basis in real-life facts, does it? :)

Before anyone berates me for "being biased" or "remaining ignorant" or "poo-pooing", or whatever, let me explain: In an argument like this, it's very easy to say "ST's weapons and shields are far stronger than SW's, and a phaser would slice through the Star Destroyer like a hot knife through butter", and vice versa, without any shred of evidence since it's all, of course, make-believe. I want to avoid that, which led to two required assumptions: 1. The two ships' weapons and shield technologies have to be assumed to be relatively comparable in terms of strength (no exactly equal, but closer than a spitwad vs. a nuke), and 2. We have to go by what "official" sources say (TV, movies, novels, sourcebooks, etc.), and if something isn't mentioned or implied, we either have to assume that it's negligible/nonexistent/whatever. You can disagree with me if you want, that's cool, but if you do, PLEASE offer another solution, just so we're all batting in the same field, okay? Thanks!

Oh, man, ANOTHER long post... seems the longer this thread gets (it's my baby, and I plan to add it to my sig, just like Esprix did with his Ask The Gay Guy bit), the longer my posts seem to get. Or maybe it's just the longer I'm with the Straight Dope...? ::shrug:: And I didn't even continue with my ideas about plasma conduits... oh well, I'll let someone else think on that one.

WareWolf
05-22-2000, 08:41 AM
The ISD could lay back out of phaser range and swarm the Enterprise's defenses with TIEs. The Enterprise has some serious capital ship type weapons, but doesn't seem to have much in the way of point defense. Imagine an aircraft carrier fighting a battleship...but the battleship has neglected to provide itself with AA weapons. No contest.

Dusty

psiflare
05-22-2000, 10:04 AM
to warewolf, i reiterate my suggestion of spread-fire photorp and phaser fire against small fighters from the isd. this is not to say that they wouldn't be a complete, possibly very disasterous pain, but these are possible. the ent-d (man, if this was vs. the ent-e...) can fire 10 photorps in 6 seconds, and each is considered "semi-autonomous", as in, independently targettable and homing within reason. it also has 14 phaser banks, and i have seen photos of multiple beams coming from a single array.

noting spoofe's comments on the weak points of the ent's structure -- that's what shields are for. while shields are up, yes, power conduits blow up and lots of stuff can break, but no weapon penetrates the shield to contact the hull. once shields are down (a very resonable possibility), yeah, that could happen. ouch. heh...

i'm not at home now so i can't check those measurements, but to comment on the armor issue, the ent has multi-layered duranium-trititanium hardened armor (or something like that...) of course, based on the laughable effect of a phaser to the hull of a typical ship, i wouldn't know how effective this is.

last thing, the rapid nadion effect used to generate phaser blasts is supposedly very efficient, more so than disruptors (slow nadions), and much more than lasers. ...of course, it's been said that turbolasers are really plasma weapons, which accounts for their relatively short range...


okay. back to class for me.


-psiflare

Monster104
05-22-2000, 11:15 AM
The ISD cannot sit out of the E's weapons range and attack with TIE's because TIE's are not hyperspace capable (Except for advanced TIE models). However, the ISD does have gunboats and assault shuttles it could use to its advantage.

I think in terms of shielding the ISD has a slight advantage in that it can adjust the strength of its shields. If one section is getting pounded on, it can divert energy from other sections to rebuild the damaged shield (And the more energy they dump into it, the faster it renews and the stronger it can get). I don't know if the E can do this, all I know is they can adjust the frequency to block phasers.

psiflare
05-22-2000, 11:44 AM
monster -- indeed the ent can divert energy to different sections of the shield and vary the strength of the sections. it's a pretty common practice...additionally, i assume also available to isds, is the option to divert power from other ship systems, such as power-intensive holodecks, etc. in dire situations, the ent has successfully even diverted power from the intertial damping field and the structural integrity field, and i believe it's possible to shut down certain decks on the ship to conserve power. it's also possible to slightly increase the fuel supply into the warp core, and the impulse fusion plants in the saucer section can be utilized...

of course, isds almost certainly have equivalents for this...


-psiflare

tracer
05-22-2000, 02:25 PM
Indeed, the unofficial Star Trek wargame Star Fleet Battles is centrally concerned with energy allocation throughout each ship. Individual shields (the shield system on a ship is divided into 6 separate shields, each facing a different direction) can be brought down, or reinforced with extra energy. All shields can be reinforced generally, but this requires twice as much energy as reinforcing a specific shield for the same degree of added protection.

SPOOFE
05-23-2000, 01:31 AM
This is s sort of hijack (hijacking my own thread? Who'd a-thunk!), but the thing with the Enterprise's shields... it's essentially a big "egg" that covers the ship, several dozen meters away from the hull, which makes the ship a bigger target, overall. Okay, the self-hijack is over.

[opinion-based speculation]
A little note about the Star Destroyer's weapons... I've been unable to find any official sources that give a hint to the turbolasers' power (the sourcebooks for the RPG may have some mention, but I don't have any of the RPG manuals... dammit!). But I've always suspected that the reason a Star Destroyer has so many turbolasers and so few proton torpedo launchers was because turbolasers were stronger than proto-torps. While this doesn't give a definite gauge of strength, it gives a general ballpark with regards to turbolaser strength (if my factless theory is correct, that is).

Another indicator of turbolaser strength is the description of what happens to other Star Wars ships when they get hit... that is, the armor plates evaporate. Yup, the turbolaser blasts are so powerful, they completely disintegrate armoring.

[opinion-based speculation off]

TIE fighters would be a nifty diversion, but more important would be the TIE bombers, which carry missiles (which are more powerful than starfighter-grade turbolasers), or the assault gunboats and Skipray blastboats. Heck, if the Star Destroyer needs to, it has shuttles, assault craft, landing craft, and any number of smaller support craft (well over a hundred, I'd estimate). This swarm of smaller craft would be disorienting to the crew of the Enterprise, to say the least.

With regards to an ISD's power supply, I think the limitations are about how much power can be shunted to systems in how much time, not if the power is available or not (heck, the power reactor for the Star Destroyer is as big as the Enterprise itself, according to an eyeball estimate from the Star Wars Incredible Cross-Sections book... and as was noted earlier in the thread, the power sources are similar). In addition, the only limitations to turbolaser fire isn't power, it's heat... they have to wait 'til the barrel sheds some heat, otherwise it'd melt.

Anyway, I've been feeling gabby lately, so I'm gonna stop ranting now, so's I can let some others give some input.

TravisT42
05-23-2000, 02:02 AM
This being my first post to the group, I wish I could come on the scene with a big bang. At this point in the thread, however, I think I'll just point y'all to a newsgroup that I have yet to see mentioned here. It's alt.startrek.vs.starwars

It's been around for years and there is still no definite resolution to the hypothetical conflict being discussed here. Considering that many of you have expressed the desire to see more technical info and specs, though, I figure those people will be grateful. Perhaps this will also serve to put an end to this thread. Sorry, Spoof, I know you consider it your baby, but it's not a very pretty one. :D

TravisT42
05-23-2000, 02:05 AM
This being my first post to the group, I wish I could come on the scene with a big bang. At this point in the thread, however, I think I'll just point y'all to a newsgroup that I have yet to see mentioned here. It's alt.startrek.vs.starwars

It's been around for years and there is still no definite resolution to the hypothetical conflict being discussed here. Considering that many of you have expressed the desire to see more technical info and specs, though, I figure those people will be grateful. Perhaps this will also serve to put an end to this thread. Sorry, Spoof, I know you consider it your baby, but it's not a very pretty one. :D

SPOOFE
05-23-2000, 02:12 AM
Welcome, welcome, Travis... your first post in my lil' ol' thread? I'm flattered!!

Yeah, I doubt we'd ever find a "definite" conclusion... I'm tryint to direct the whole thread into a series of offered scenarios that sound interesting. Some possibilities have the Star Destroyer whupping butt, some have the Enterprise kicking ass, lots more have a draw.

Why do I want people to put in their own ideas for event-chains? Well, I plan on writing a short story about it, silly people! I'll let everyone know in MPSIMS when it's done (I'm sure this thread will die out long after I'm gone).

TravisT42
05-23-2000, 02:16 AM
This being my first post to the group, I wish I could come on the scene with a big bang. At this point in the thread, however, I think I'll just point y'all to a newsgroup that I have yet to see mentioned here. It's alt.startrek.vs.starwars

It's been around for years and there is still no definite resolution to the hypothetical conflict being discussed here. Considering that many of you have expressed the desire to see more technical info and specs, though, I figure those people will be grateful. Perhaps this will also serve to put an end to this thread. Sorry, Spoof, I know you consider it your baby, but it's not a very pretty one. :D

tracer
05-23-2000, 11:15 AM
SPOOFE Bo Diddly:

In the Star Wars universe, ion cannons aren't stopped by shields because the shields are only ray shields, and ions are charged particles!

Oh, come on, Tracer! Just about EVERYTHING is the result of a particle or two... radiation is nothing more than hurtling particles (the smaller the particle, the more dangerous the radiation), light is a bunch of photons... etc. As Dark Helmet once said... "What's with you man? Come ON!" Particle shields are designed to stop "macro" objects, while ray shields are designed to stop "micro" objects.

You're right, I must've been remembering something I read in the ST:TNG Tech Manual about the Enterprise's shields stopping charged particles, and confused it with the Star Wars universe.

However, I did find the following information in the "Ion Cannons" entry of the Star Wars Essential Guide to Weapons & Tech:

Since ion blasts are unimpaired by energy shields, ships have no defense against them short of reconfiguring their shields -- and this would make the shields useless for absorbing standard laser blasts. [emphasis mine]

So it is possible for Star Wars shields to stop ion cannon blasts if they are "reconfigured" for it.

Star Trek shields seem to be more "universal" in what they can stop than Star Wars shields are. Trek shields combine the functions of Star Wars ray shields and Star Wars particle shields, and have been shown on film to be effective against plasma attacks (c.f. ST:TOS "Balance of Terror" and ST:TMP). Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that they would be able to interdict ion cannon blasts as well.

Thor Odinson
05-23-2000, 11:38 AM
Couple of Points:

1.) The much talked about Laser Quote comes from 'The Outrageous Okona' and is contradicted by the very next episode. (And a couple more after that.)

2.) SW shields would stop Transporters. Hell, just about everything stops transporters.

3.) For More information go to alt.startrek.vs.starwars
They are very friendly to newbies giving them a warm reception.

C.S.Strowbridge ASVS Master
http://members.home.net/strowbridge/Index.htm

tracer
05-23-2000, 01:57 PM
Okay then, Thor and Travis, maybe you can tell us:

CAN an Imperial Star Destroyer's sensors track an object moving at faster-than-light speed?

Thor Odinson
05-23-2000, 02:21 PM
Okay then, Thor and Travis, maybe you can tell us:

CAN an Imperial Star Destroyer's sensors track an object moving at faster-than-light speed?


Yes, the Hyperspace cutout systems demands FTL sensors. That and the communication / sensor systems use the same medium.

BTW, those domes are NOT shields. The man who designed the ISD calls them sensor domes.

Thor Odinson
05-23-2000, 02:38 PM
Okay then, Thor and Travis, maybe you can tell us:

CAN an Imperial Star Destroyer's sensors track an object moving at faster-than-light speed?


Yes, the Hyperspace cutout systems demands FTL sensors. That and the communication / sensor systems use the same medium.

BTW, those domes are NOT shields. The man who designed the ISD calls them sensor domes.

TravisT42
05-23-2000, 07:04 PM
I see you get around Strowbridge. :) I've only posted a couple things on the STvsSW NG, but I have read plenty of yours.

*praying this only posts ONE time*

Travis

TravisT42
05-23-2000, 07:16 PM
I see you get around Strowbridge. :) I've only posted a couple things on the STvsSW NG, but I have read plenty of yours.

*praying this only posts ONE time*

Travis

SPOOFE
05-23-2000, 08:26 PM
Star Trek shields seem to be more "universal" in what they can stop than Star Wars shields are.

Well, not only "universal", but more "worryful". It's like they designed the shields to be a "catch-all" system, but it's like those All-In-Wonder video cards... they're designed to do everything, but only perform at every task in a mediocre manner. Just about any random phenomena seems to damage the shields, from quantum storms to interference from a planet's atmoshpere... then the shields become neutralized at the drop of a hat (and also when it seems most inconvenient, too... and you don't get much more inconvenient than having a Star Destroyer gunning for you).

tracer
05-26-2000, 08:45 PM
Thor Odinson wrote:

CAN an Imperial Star Destroyer's sensors track an object moving at faster-than-light speed?

Yes, the Hyperspace cutout systems demands FTL sensors. That and the communication / sensor systems use the same medium.

But in the Timothy Zah Thrawn trilogy, the Kimura lost communication with each of the other Star Destroyers as the other Star Destroyers jumped into hyperspace. And this was normal and expected.

tracer
05-26-2000, 08:49 PM
Er, Timothy Zahn, not Timothy Zah.

SPOOFE
05-27-2000, 04:06 AM
Yes, the Hyperspace cutout systems demands FTL sensors. That and the communication / sensor systems use the same medium.

Well, the hyperdrive cutout system is different than detecting "objects" in hyperspace... the cutout system is designed to anticipate the presence of a large gravity shadow ahead of the vessel and drop out of hyperspace before hitting said shadow. Large gravity wells make the local hyperspace "sluggish" (or distort it somehow... it's never really explained), and most likely will destroy any ship passing through that gravity shadow.

The hyperdrive cutout system can only track a few moments ahead of the ship... even with a good cutout system, a ship can still be damaged from the distorted hyperspace around a planet, star, or even an interdictor cruiser.

Also, similar sensors CAN be used to track another ship in hyperspace, but ONLY if the ship being tracked is REALLY close (this was done in the Black Fleet Crisis, but I can't remember if it was book two or book three... probably both). Thus, the uses of Star Wars' FTL sensors are minimal and wouldn't apply in the slightest against the Enterprise.

Now, transmissions for the Star Destroyer are done WAAAAAAY faster than light, via the holonet (it's never explained how this works, but the gist of it is that the entire galaxy is linked to an instantaneous transmission system... however, it takes considerable resources to tap into the holonet, so only larger ships have holonet capability, usually). Theoretically, the only problem that prevents vessels from being able to transmit to each other while in hyperspace is the fact that, in hyperspace, everything is moving so dang fast, and if a ship is only a few hundred meters (billionths of a second in hyperspace) away from the expected location, the transmission wouldn't get through.

And there're other things, too, but I won't get into them because this post is already too long.

Punyon
05-31-2000, 02:42 AM
Here's the possible scenarios I can come up with:

1. before Picard can hail the star destroyer and get choked by vader, Troy senses the hatred, fear, and anger in Vatder, and warns Picard. Picard launches a salvo of photon torpedos and we say buh-bye to the ISD.

2. Vader uses the Jedi Mind Trick to cause Picard to surrender. He then moves about the Enterprise killing people for fun and profit.

3. The ISD incapasitates the Enterprise somehow and they work feverishly to fix it, succeding with some brilliant plan in exactly one hour (which is also coincidentally how long the show is!)

4. The Enterprise beams over Data, who cleans house on Vader, since he's not human and can't be choked, mind-tricked, and he's so fast, he can probably keep up with Vader in a lightsaber battle... Now THAT'S a fight I'd pay to see!

Punyon
05-31-2000, 02:43 AM
Here's the possible scenarios I can come up with:

1. before Picard can hail the star destroyer and get choked by vader, Troy senses the hatred, fear, and anger in Vatder, and warns Picard. Picard launches a salvo of photon torpedos and we say buh-bye to the ISD.

2. Vader uses the Jedi Mind Trick to cause Picard to surrender. He then moves about the Enterprise killing people for fun and profit.

3. The ISD incapasitates the Enterprise somehow and they work feverishly to fix it, succeding with some brilliant plan in exactly one hour (which is also coincidentally how long the show is!)

4. The Enterprise beams over Data, who cleans house on Vader, since he's not human and can't be choked, mind-tricked, and he's so fast, he can probably keep up with Vader in a lightsaber battle... Now THAT'S a fight I'd pay to see!

SPOOFE
05-31-2000, 04:24 AM
Well, we never really determined that Vader was aboard the Star Destroyer... but it seems to be a popular concept, so what the heck! It's not like you'll get penalized or anything, so it sounds good to me... except for number 4: An android can be affected by the Force, too, just like those battle droids in Episode 1 or the knick-knacks hanging around the Cloud City bowels.

Amusing, though... hehe...

ig88
05-31-2000, 05:43 AM
Hey guys! A new geek arrives!
Now, please don't jump on me, I have reviewed this only very briefly. If anything is wrong, don't hesitate to tell me! I, upon glancing at the Star Trek Encyclopedia for approximately 30 seconds, read that it is inadvisable to go to warp drive in a solar system because the gravity affects the warp core in a very negative way, usually stopping warp drive. Now if we bring in the Interdictor, a sub-class of Star Destroyer, we have a solution. Interdiction field stops warp drive, Interdictor constantly microjumps to get within blasting range and opens fire. Anyone agree!

ig88
05-31-2000, 05:44 AM
Hey guys! A new geek arrives!
Now, please don't jump on me, I have reviewed this only very briefly. If anything is wrong, don't hesitate to tell me! I, upon glancing at the Star Trek Encyclopedia for approximately 30 seconds, read that it is inadvisable to go to warp drive in a solar system because the gravity affects the warp core in a very negative way, usually stopping warp drive. Now if we bring in the Interdictor, a sub-class of Star Destroyer, we have a solution. Interdiction field stops warp drive, Interdictor constantly microjumps to get within blasting range and opens fire. Anyone agree!

ig88
05-31-2000, 05:46 AM
Mumble..mumble...dang Internet connection...

Gaudere
05-31-2000, 01:52 PM
[Moderator Hat ON]

Movin' to IMHO. One more Trek thread for ya, slythe--now you have a thread that's been featured in Threadspotting!

[Moderator Hat OFF]

soulsling
05-31-2000, 02:19 PM
Slythe, you have just earned the longest thread that may ever be, IMHO.

sorry for the hyjack!

feels like a huge shinook came and moved a house of granite over from New Guinea to the top of Mt.Everest.

How many of you moderators and Admins did it take to lift this thing??? Hats off to you gentlemen and ladies, and congratulations Spoofe on a job well done here...
:)

tracer
05-31-2000, 03:03 PM
ig88 wrote:

I, upon glancing at the Star Trek Encyclopedia for approximately 30 seconds, read that it is inadvisable to go to warp drive in a solar system because the gravity affects the warp core in a very negative way, usually stopping warp drive.

This notion comes from Star Trek: The Motion Picture, in which Admiral Kirk explains that it is dangerous to engage the newly-refitted Enterprise's warp drive while still in the Solar system, and in which the Enterprise's warp drive does indeed create an accidental wormhole when they do engage it.

The problem is, the show contradicts this point in every single episode where the Enterprise is shown operating within a star system. In Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home, the crew even takes a Kilingon Bird of Prey to warp speed while it's still in Earth's atmosphere! The original series frequently shows Kirk ordering "ahead, warp one" while the Enterprise is just beginning to leave orbit. The TOS episode "Arena" has the Enterprise chasing a Gorn vessel within a star system at warp eight, and arming its weapons at the same time.

My guess -- and that of some other Trekkers, I'm sure -- is that in Star Trek: The Motion Picture, Kirk was referring to the danger of running into other ships if they went to warp speed within the Sol system. The Sol system is, after all, the big central metropolitan hub of the entire Federation, as well as the home of Star Fleet headquarters. The fact that the Enterprise subsequently created its own wormhole in the same movie can be attributed to its new-and-untested warp drive system, rather than to the fact that they happened to be inside the orbit of Pluto.

There is no evidence in any of the Trek episodes, 23rd or 24th century, that normal gravity interferes with warp drive.

SPOOFE
05-31-2000, 08:20 PM
Thank you, thank you, Soulsling. I'm so proud. ::sniff::

ANYway, I would imagine that the effects of gravity on the Enterprise-D would be negligible, and the Star Destroyer doesn't have a spare Interdictor lying around anyway, so that point's negligible. An interesting thought, though.

I'm curious, though... we know that, at top impulse speed, the Enterprise can move faster than the Star Destroyer, but what kind of acceleration does it have? How long, on average, would be the delay between the captain giving the order and the Enterprise powering up the engine and getting away? And, lastly, can the Enterprise jump directly to warp from a stationary position, without any forward velocity?

I'm surprised at myself... I should have asked this earlier.

SPOOFE
05-31-2000, 08:22 PM
Did I actually use the word "negligible" twice in the same sentence? Ew, that sounds so unnatural.

dpr
05-31-2000, 09:43 PM
... except for number 4: An android can be affected by the Force, too, just like those battle droids in Episode 1 or the knick-knacks hanging around the Cloud City bowels.

Amusing, though... hehe...


We've had this discussion before in our friends group and we believe Data's reflexes would enable him to keep up with a jedi in a lightsabre duel. We brought up the telekinetic use of the force but it was pointed out that Data weighs something approaching 10 tonnes which may be a strain for anyone short of Vader and even he and the emporer may struggle. Where our discussion broke down was a) using the focre to fling other things at Data would distract and b) Data's code could prevent him from killing even Vader (he'd surely prefer incapacitation) and the fact that the Empire could possibly use a hostage situation to force Data's hand (so to speak).

dpr
05-31-2000, 09:56 PM
... except for number 4: An android can be affected by the Force, too, just like those battle droids in Episode 1 or the knick-knacks hanging around the Cloud City bowels.

Amusing, though... hehe...


We've had this discussion before in our friends group and we believe Data's reflexes would enable him to keep up with a jedi in a lightsabre duel. We brought up the telekinetic use of the force but it was pointed out that Data weighs something approaching 10 tonnes which may be a strain for anyone short of Vader and even he and the emporer may struggle. Where our discussion broke down was a) using the focre to fling other things at Data would distract and b) Data's code could prevent him from killing even Vader (he'd surely prefer incapacitation) and the fact that the Empire could possibly use a hostage situation to force Data's hand (so to speak).

dpr
05-31-2000, 09:58 PM
Apologies for the double post.

As always, it was technology that was to blame.

TravisT42
05-31-2000, 11:59 PM
Erm, correct me if I'm wrong. But I coulda sworn I've seen a couple of eps in TNG where Data's prone body was lifted by a couple of fellow crew members. Doesn't that make the claim that he weighs 10 tonnes rather suspect?

And besides, when will you padawans ever learn "Size matters not." ? :)

SPOOFE
06-01-2000, 01:49 AM
I'm hijacking my own thread again...

Data's reflexes would enable him to keep up with a Jedi?

In Shadows of the Empire, Guri, a human replica droid, fought with Luke. Now, Guri was designed for speed and strength (it was said that she was the only HRD designed to be an assassin), so I'd imagine that her reflexes would be better than Data's (I've never seen anything to imply that his reflexes were supernaturally faster than a human's... although if someone gives a cite I wouldn't mind acknowledging that... Tracer, where are you?). Anyway, Luke had a fight with her, and it wasn't until he began "allowing the Force to flow through him" that he managed to get the upper hand... really easily, too.

With Vader, who's better at that sort of thing, I don't think he'd have much trouble. But Vader is one of those "wild cards" that I don't like to include in debates like this, just because his exact capabilities are unknown.

In fact, to get sorta back on topic, whenever I argue with friends about the OP, I usually get rid of any of the "star characters" from either series and just include an "average Fed crew" and an "average Imp crew", just to avoid things like "Well, Data could do THIS" or "Vader could do THAT".

dpr
06-01-2000, 02:28 AM
Well SPOOFE, I'm on your side in this but Data is capable of moving considerably faster than humans. A lot faster. On teh weight thing however I'm still a bit unsure. Yoda lifted an X-Wing and could have probably lifted more (he da green man after all).

chief
06-01-2000, 03:23 AM
Data doesnt use his superhuman abilities as much since he wants to fit in with the crew more.

Non-Curved Narcotic
06-04-2000, 12:01 AM
After stumbling upon this debate I felt I had to offer my own humble opinions. Scanning through the various messages I've seen good points made and interesting questions raised on both sides of the issue, but here are the basic facts that I think tip the scales hughly in favor of the Star Destroyer...

For the sake of this discussion, let's assume a standard Imperial Star Detroyer and not the larger monsters Vader was fond of. I think the standard version is enough...

Can the SD's turbolasers effect the Enterprise? It was mentioned that turbolasers might not even effect the Enterprise's shields, based on a comment in a Trek episode in which they scoffed at 'lasers' being used against the Enterprise. Well 'turbolasers' aren't 'lasers'. Lasers are basically just amplified light, they impart no kinetic energy. They just cut through their target. Star Wars era turbolasers have a kinetic effect (the bolts 'explode' upon impact). So based on that alone I think it's safe to say that turbolasers would definitely be effective.

Size matters: The ISD is 1600 meters long, is equipped with 60 turbolasers, 60 ion cannons, 72 tie fighters and a crew of approx. 37,000 (not counting droids). The Enterprise D is 641 meters long, has two photon torpedo launchers, one phaser array ring (unknown how many phaser shots can be fired at once, but episodes have shown it firing at least 5-6 at a time...figure at least 12 just to be fair), and a crew of a little over 1,000. Both ships have shields (i.e. electronic defenses), but the ISD also has heavy plate armor. Everything else aside the ISD can soak up a lot more damage just due to its size. Also, the Enterprise has ONE weapons officer firing ship's weapons. And even if he can fire all weapons at once that's one spread of torpedoes and about a dozen phaser blasts. The ISD uses a gunner for each weapon, giving it 120 shots at one time, not counting the tie fighters. And of course the Enterprise would be swarmed by tie fighters, both standard and bombers styles.

Can Star Trek transporters go through Star Wars shields? We have no way to know for sure, but if Star Wars shields are effective against weapons it stands to reason that they would effect transporters as well. Why does this matter though? People have mentioned that all the Enterprise would have to do is transport a bomb to the ISD. Moot point, the Federation doesn't fight that way. When did you ever see the Enterprise "bomb" an enemy ship? They had plenty of opportunity to do so, but they're too honorable to do that. But assuming that they get desperate enough to do so the ISD's shields would most likely stop their transporters. If not, the ISD could soak up a lot of damage that way while it's weapons and tie fighters were ripping the Enterprise apart. The only other reason to use the transporter would be to board the ISD, but the Enterprise doesn't carry marines, and even if they used their entire crew they would be out-numbering 37 to 1, against Storm Troopers in body armor and heavy blast weapons.

Due to sheer scale of size and number of weapons the ISD would definitely be the victor. The Enterprise could escape if it wanted. While hyper-drive is faster than warp it has to be plotted in advance and it's basically a straight-line mode of movement. Warp is 'steerable', so the Enterprise could duck out and escape but it couldn't hold it's own against an ISD in a one-on-one slug feast.

Now, if you really want to consider a fair fight...how about an Imperial Star Destroyer vs. the Battlestar Galactica?

SPOOFE
06-04-2000, 05:37 AM
Welcome to the SDMB, Non-Curved Narcotic. I'm flattered that you chose my humble 'lil thread to post in first.

Star Destroyer vs. BS-Galactica? Should be fun, though I know nothing about the Galactica itself. Why don't you start your own thread? Break into the SDMB with a GNAB!

HaploXL
06-26-2000, 05:06 AM
Thsi Question was first pointed out to my friends and I in an issue of Inquest, a magazine about CCGs. This spawned an arguement that lasted about 4-5 months till we desided to just have a *i cant beleave i am about to say this* "intelegent" discution.

Both ships have the ability to go faster then light but the Enterprise can split up.. So the can run attack and as they start to lose run like hell. OR sence there can be two parts of the ship they can seperate adn ram INTO the ISD an dend it in a draw. Or they can even drag the borg into it.

*aka selling picards ass: "Yea, we'll give you the old fart..just kill those guys"*

Now for brute strength the ISD is a sure to win ship. *My choise personaly i finaly got them to see it my way >=) *
It has more weapons and the lil tie fighters. Cant forget teh shields to.

And if that dont convense you then how about this....the Enterpirse has wesly crusher....evil is alwasy distroyed in teh movies adn next to wesly the empire is filled with saits. ewwww the evil THE EVIL!!!

_______________________________
No i dont have a life...does that suprise you?

HaploXL
06-26-2000, 05:06 AM
Thsi Question was first pointed out to my friends and I in an issue of Inquest, a magazine about CCGs. This spawned an arguement that lasted about 4-5 months till we desided to just have a *i cant beleave i am about to say this* "intelegent" discution.

Both ships have the ability to go faster then light but the Enterprise can split up.. So the can run attack and as they start to lose run like hell. OR sence there can be two parts of the ship they can seperate adn ram INTO the ISD an dend it in a draw. Or they can even drag the borg into it.

*aka selling picards ass: "Yea, we'll give you the old fart..just kill those guys"*

Now for brute strength the ISD is a sure to win ship. *My choise personaly i finaly got them to see it my way >=) *
It has more weapons and the lil tie fighters. Cant forget teh shields to.

And if that dont convense you then how about this....the Enterpirse has wesly crusher....evil is alwasy distroyed in teh movies adn next to wesly the empire is filled with saits. ewwww the evil THE EVIL!!!

_______________________________
No i dont have a life...does that suprise you?

HomeSlice
06-26-2000, 08:11 PM
Lets just say that the enterprise reached speeds up to Warp 10, wouldn't they travel back in time to save some whales?

SILENT-BOB NOT REALLY
06-28-2000, 08:43 PM
:wally

SILENT-BOB NOT REALLY
06-28-2000, 08:45 PM
:wally

SILENT-BOB NOT REALLY
06-28-2000, 08:48 PM
:wally

Myrr21
07-07-2000, 12:03 AM
On the issue of firing from warp speed at non-FTL targets:
Although I recall no specific episodes in which this happens, that makes sense. The warp, fire, warp or warp while shooting tactic will not work against ST ships. A Star Trek ship can track the Enterprise while warping, or can warp to follow. So of course it won't come up. Even if they did try it, the combat would essentially instantly become sub-FTL or at warp.
Moreover, there's no reason to believe that a weapon fired from warp speed couldn't hit a target not at warp--as far as I can tell, while travelling at warp, you still occupy the same "realspace" as at impulse; this is as opposed to hyperspace, which is clearly different.
As for the amount of damage possible using this tactic, I don't know positively (of course). However, I can relate a similar experience from playing TIE fighter:
While it is extremely difficult to destroy large ships with small surgical strikes, it can be done. The shields regenerate quickly, but if done well, you can eliminate the opposition without taking more than a hit or two.
Of course, the ISD could still just hyperspace away...but that's another issue.

Dark Goblin
07-19-2000, 02:35 PM
Okay, first off, the big picture. Trek universe vs. wars universe (the Force aside).

I saw a post on the first page of this absurdly-long thread (I only read the first and last pages) saying something about the entire Federation vs. the Empire. The Empire was listed as having 25,000 ships in this conflict (TIEs, I think, I forget), and the Federation (ENTIRE Federation) as having 300 ships. That's absurd. In the Deep Space Nine episode "Favor The Bold," the Federation fleet goes to retake DS9, only to encounter the Dominion/Cardassian fleet. The D/C fleet consists of about 1200 some-odd ships. Bashir states, "they outnumber us almost 2 to 1." Half of 1200 is 600. And that was just one fleet (the Ninth Fleet, actually). I'm not certain, but I think the Klingons were there too (the Romulans weren't pulled into the war until the last season). This seems to indicate that the Federation has AT LEAST 8 other fleets, which consist of probably around 300 ships (if you assume that the Klingon ships composed half of the fleet that set out to retake DS9). That amounts to about 2700 ships. And while there's never been any mention of it, there may well be more fleets. And this doesn't even count the Romulans, Klingons, Cardassians, the Breen, and the Dominion. Oh yes, and I seem to ahve forgotten the Borg, but that's a whole other story. A combined fleet of Federation, Klingon, Romulan, Cardassian, Dominion, and Breen ships is at least possible, given the end of "What You Leave Behind" (at that time, the Federation, Klingons, and Romulans were already united against the Dominion, so treaties with them are possible, and the Federation signd a cease-fire with the Dominion as well, opening up possibilities for treaties, and the Dominion was aligned with the Breen and the Cardassians, so they might follow suit as well, AND with Garak helping to rebuild Cardassia, they might not be as antagonistic towards the Federation, with Garak's POV in place). I don't think the Borg are stupid enough to form a "temporary treaty" with those races, then attempt to turn against them when they've prevailed. The Borg would be fried. Anyway, there's been discussion rwgarding whether or not transporters could get through Star Wars shields. This is, in the end, irrelevant, because Dominion ships are equipped with transporters that can get through shields anyway. Stormtroopers don't stand a chance against Jem'Hadar warriors, especially with that dinky armor that doesn't even protect them against a laser. They also have polaron beam weapons which punch right through Federation shields. The Breen have the energy dampening weapon. Klingons, Romulans and Breen all have cloaking devices, which would catch the Empire off guard. And the Federation... Well, okay, the Federation doesn't have anything that's particularly interesting, although several of their ships have been designed specifically to fight the Borg (Steamrunner, Akira, Defiant, Sovereign). Also, several of the new ships have ablative hull armor, which provides for a little protection. They've also got new blue (much better looking than the photon orange) quantum torpedoes. And then we come to the Cardassians. They've got spiral wave disruptors. Oh, well la de da. Cardassians were never very interesting anyway. Their only major accomplishment was the occupation of Bajor, and they eventually got kicked out anyway. Even when allied with the Dominion, they were just puppets of the Founders. So don't figure the cardassian fleet having any major impact on the battle :)
Oh yes, and the thing about the Star Destroyer's energy source (black hole). Even if it's not true, which has been stated, Romulan D'Deridex-class ships use an artificial quantum singularity as their power source as well, and these ships are also significantly larger than Galaxy-class ships (Galaxy-class ships are around 640 meters, so figure maybe...at least 700 meters, if not more).
And then, there's possible intervention by the Prophets if Bajor (or even the entire Alpha Quadrant) were truly in danger, but that's unlikely, and the only time they ever intervened was to make certain that Sisko didn't die in "Sacrifice of Angels" (because he COULDN'T die, because that wasn't when the game ends). They also had to save Bajor as well.

Anyway, the Borg vs. the Empire. Bye bye, Vader. Several people have mentioned that a Star Destroyer would destroy (I'm sorry, I'm sorry) a Borg cube easily. However, the Enterprise was barely able to even scratch the cube with their strongest phaser bursts. Barring Voyager (haven't seen any of the Borg episodes, and the Voyager writers are on crack anyway), we've only seen a cube destroyed twice. The first time was in "The Best of Both Worlds." It was destroyed by the Borg themselves, actually, not the Enterprise or the fleet that fought it at Wolf 359. When Data gave the cube a sleep command through Locutus, the cube set itself to self-destruct to prevent their technology from falling into Federation hands. So, no weapons there. The second time was in First Contact. The fleet defending Earth was fighting a losing battle until the Enterprise came in. Just listen to the voices heard over the comm chanel on the bridge. Admiral Hayes' ship was destroyed (although Hayes survived, as Voyager later shows), the Defiant was a derelict (although salvagable), the Lexington apparently had many wounded officers (it's one of the ships I remember hearing mentioned). The only reason the cube was destroyed is because Picard knew where to fire (an apparently-unobvious weak spot on the cube that even Data didn't notice). Now, let's consider the Star Destroyer. It's got turbolasers, which may or may not be as powerful as phasers. Whoopty-doo. The Enterprise's phasers didn't do much to the cube anyway. We'll never actually know if their deflector burst weapon would have worked against a Locutus-less cube (it failed because Picard knew of the plan; this knowledge was passed on to Locutus and provided to the Collective so they could adapt). However, it probably would have done at least very significant damage to the cube. But more than 78%? Cubes can operate even if 78% of it is inoperable, according to Shelby's estimates. From what I can recall, this burst was designed to hit the cube in several places at once (although, in one big burst, meant to disable several systems at once). And they would only have one shot at it, since it would end up burning out their deflector.
Do Star Wars ships even HAVE navigational deflectors like the ones in Star Trek? If so, would they even bother to try making a weapon like that? In a one-on-one encounter, the ISD actually wouldn't have the chance to make the weapon anyway (the Enterprise did actually have some time to work on the weapon). And this is just one cube. Even if it were to be destroyed, the rest of the ships would adapt to whatever destroyed the first ship and then go after the ISD to assimilate the technology capable of destroying a cube. Weapons aside, I seriously doubt that an ISD is anywhere near the size of a cube. From what's been mentioned here, ISDs are 1600 meters long. Sovereign-class ships are nearly half that at almost 700 meters (680, actually). The cube in First Contact dwarfed the Enterprise. And that's one cube. And this isn't taking into account the ability of Borg ships to pop out of a transwarp conduit anywhere. One cube is under fire, send in 2 or 3 more through a transwarp conduit right behind the ISD and begin assimilation.
The entire Empire vs. the entire Collective (hell, half the Collective, or even 1/4) would end up with the Borg having tons of new ships and drones to play with.

Now, I'm not saying that either of these would be short battles, and the Trek sides (Fed/Rom/Kli/Card/Dom/Breen being one, Borg being another) would both certainly take vast casualties (the Borg would take less). But given technology levels, I'd have to say that the Trek universe gets the upper hand, in the end.

Of course, people might have already brought up all of this, I dunno. I'm just killing time.

carnivorousplant
07-19-2000, 06:33 PM
I enjoyed writing the satire a couple of months ago, but guys, aren't we really talking here about whether Bart Simpson can take Bugs Bunny?

SPOOFE
07-19-2000, 06:48 PM
Ah... I AM flattered that another person put his first post in my thread (and resurrected the damn thing, too), but next time, Mr. Goblin, divide the thing into more paragraphs, huh? It's a bit of a hard read.

Anyway... the title of this thread is "Enterprise vs. Star Destroyer". It's about what would happen should the U.S.S. Enterprise, from Star Trek, encounter an Imperial-class Star Destroyer, from Star Wars. While I appreciate the "Federation/Klingons/Whatevers vs. Empire", that's stuff that's already been brought up.

Anyway, points of clarification...

The Empire was listed as having 25,000 ships in this conflict (TIEs, I think, I forget)

Actually, it was having 25,000 Imperial Star Destroyers. It was also listed as probably having several thousand of each smaller class of support ships (dreadnaughts, cruisers, carriers, frigates, corvettes, etc.) TIE fighter count probably ranged in the millions (ISD's carried 72 of 'em each, then there're all the fighters to go with the smaller ships, and then for planetary defenses... so I would imagine ten million TIE's running around to be a safe estimate).

But the Empire only has one ship in this conflict, a Star Destroyer, while the Federation only has the Enterprise. Simplifies things down a bit.

Anyway, there's been discussion rwgarding whether or not transporters could get through Star Wars shields. This is, in the end, irrelevant, because Dominion ships are equipped with transporters that can get through shields anyway.

This is, in the end, also irrelevant, since we're not pitting a Star Destroyer against a Dominion vessel. Second, I think it's been shown that Star Wars' shields are a lot more solid than Trek shields (ST shields work on a frequencey basis, which allows specially designed transporter beams to get through... SW ray shields basically create a complete, impenetrable wall around the ship, keeping all forms of foreign energy OUT).

Stormtroopers don't stand a chance against Jem'Hadar warriors

Again, not part of the argument, m'boy... but even so, I would imagine Stormtroopers would have a better chance than you think. Stormtrooper armor is designed not to stop a laser blast, but to ablate the blast, meaning it spreads the heat and energy out over a larger area, giving the wearer of the armor a much better chance of surviving a shot. Are Jem'Hadar weapons designed to penetrate armor, as blaster rifles are? I don't know, I don't build Jem'Hadar weapons. Anyway, moving on...

So don't figure the cardassian fleet having any major impact on the battle

I don't figure the Cardassian Fleet having any impact whatsoever on the battle, since they ain't there :D

Oh yes, and the thing about the Star Destroyer's energy source (black hole).

Actually, the ISD uses a matter/anitmatter reaction, same as Federation ships, except the reactor core is MUUUUUCH bigger (a simple eyeball estimate from the Star Wars: Incredible Cross-Sections book shows the ISD reactor to probably be as massive as the entire Enterprise itself, which probably shows that the ISD generates much more power).

these ships (Romulan Warbirds) are also significantly larger than Galaxy-class ships (Galaxy-class ships are around 640 meters, so figure maybe...at least 700 meters, if not more).

Galaxy-class ships are 650 meters (slight nitpick, sorry, but it IS my thread). I would imagine that Warbirds are more than 50 meters longer than the Enterprise... I've always imagined them to be nearer 900-1000 meters long. Anyone have a definite length for these babies? (Off-topic, I know, but now I'm curious).

Anyway, the Borg vs. the Empire.

Again, not part of the argument. Maybe you can start your own thread on the subject...? I'd post there... but I think everyone would kill me if I started another Star Wars/Star Trek thread.

Now, let's consider the Star Destroyer. It's got turbolasers, which may or may not be as powerful as phasers.

Actually, for the sake of argument, we had decided that Turbolasers are roughly on par with Phasers, lest we get into a "Phasers are weak/Turbolasers are weak" shout-match. 'Sides, the Star Destroyer's equipped with dozens of the things (60 or 80, depending on the source book), along with ion cannons (40 or 60, again, depending on the source book). The highest estimate I've seen for the Enterprise's phaser banks was 12, and the lowest was, well, one (but we all know it's got more than that).

Do Star Wars ships even HAVE navigational deflectors like the ones in Star Trek?

Dunno, I'd have to dig up my old source books for that one. They've lain dormant somewhere in my room for the past month... I'll get back to you with that answer.

The cube in First Contact dwarfed the Enterprise.

Not exactly... if you do an eyeball estimate, I'd imagine that the Enterprise-E is only slightly shorter than one side of the Cube. An ISD would probably be longer than a single side of a Cube (though not as massive, overall). Again, off-topic, but just wanted to address that, should a "Borg vs. Empire" thread ever come into being.

And this isn't taking into account the ability of Borg ships to pop out of a transwarp conduit anywhere.

Well, getting into and out of transwarp takes several seconds, so it's not a matter of instantaneous transportation. In addition, hyperspace travel is probably on par with transwarp... probably a bit faster, even. But even so, an object in transwarp cannot interact with an object in hyperspace. Heck, objects in hyperspace have difficulty interacting with objects in hyperspace.

The entire Empire vs. the entire Collective

Again, that's up to debate, considering that the Cube/ISD ratio may be roughly equal (but that's up to debate, even though I won't change my mind on that one until someone gives me definite numbers on Cube numbers, along with a good source). But, again, off-topic, just wanted to address the point.

Anyway, a long reply to a long post. Ah, well... it's not like anyone still reads this monster of a thread (although I consider it more entertaining than Esprix's "Ask the Gay Guy" threads, but that's just me :D).

SPOOFE
07-19-2000, 06:53 PM
aren't we really talking here about whether Bart Simpson can take Bugs Bunny?

Actually, Carny, I see this argument on equal footing with "Gore vs. Bush".

Vincent99999
08-24-2000, 11:26 PM
In my opinion it's no contest. The Enterprise would win. First off the Star Destroyer doesn't have as much munoverablility as the Enterprise and doesn't have as good a pilot as Data. The Enterprise can also fight at warp while Star Destroyers can't. Star Destroyers just target a ship and fire while the Enterprise can target vital systems one by one(starting with the shield generators). The force users would be cancelled out by telepaths because I don't think Vader is gonna be able to concentrate very well if he has a person in his head yelling at him and distracting him. Thanks for listening.

SPOOFE
08-25-2000, 03:48 AM
Again, I'm flattered you chose my humble little thread to place your first post in, but allow me to clarify some things...

First off the Star Destroyer doesn't have as much munoverablility as the Enterprise and doesn't have as good a pilot as Data.

As has been mentioned several times in this (abysmally long) thread, a Star Destroyer has 8 tractor beam projectors, one of which would be far more than capable of locking the Enteprise into place.

The Enterprise can also fight at warp while Star Destroyers can't.

Yes, but it's never been established that the Enterprise can fire from warp at a target that's not in warp. In addition, the problems of attacking entirely from warp include the inability to get off more than a single shot before the E gets out of range (traveling at several times the speed of light tends to do this really quickly). Finally, it's also been shown that the ISD's mode of FTL transit (via hyperspace) is much faster than warp.

Star Destroyers just target a ship and fire while the Enterprise can target vital systems one by one(starting with the shield generators).

Incorrect. Star Destroyers certainly do target vital areas of a ship. Case in point: At the very beginning of Episode IV: A New Hope the Devastator manages to get a direct hit on the Tantive IV's main communications dish. Just because you never saw a Star Destroyer do this in any of the movies doesn't mean it CAN'T.

Second, you assume that the Enterprise would immediately be capable of detecting shield generators. Fine, I can live with that... they've shown themselves capable of detecting all manner of energy fields. However, there is no centralized weapons system on a Star Destroyer, unlike the Enterprise (and many other ships in Star Trek), and the E would be hard-pressed to find out exactly where the bridge on a behemoth like the ISD is situated. So that advantage doesn't seem very important.

And finally, the shields on the ISD are hardly as important as they are on the Enterprise. The E would, quite literally, fall apart if it didn't have its' energy fields surrounding it. The ISD is designed for incredibly powerful hull strength, and would require several photon torpedo blasts to puncture very deeply into the hull.

The force users would be cancelled out by telepaths because I don't think Vader is gonna be able to concentrate very well if he has a person in his head yelling at him and distracting him.

What telepaths? Troi? She's an "empath"... she's capable of sensing feelings, nothing more. I don't recall any instance where she even demonstrated any powers of manipulation. If Vader were involved in this fight, I see no reason why any mental counter-measures deployed by the Enterprise crew would faze him in the slightest (additionally, one would assume he'd be capable of blocking any other telepaths from entering his mind).

I apologize to all the other 'Dopers for this thread continuing to exist... but hey, it's MY baby.

Silvio
08-25-2000, 05:29 AM
Hate to come into the tail end of a long thread, but isn't it obvious that Star Trek technology is at least a couple of centuries ahead of Star Wars?

Star Wars has no replicaters, no holodeck, no transporters, no Data level androids, and much more primitive sensors. Hard to believe all of that computer technology doesn't imply a tech level far beyond Star Wars, and it's hard to see how that wouldn't pay off.

Has is it established that hyperspace is faster than warp drive? In the first Star Wars movie, Solo says the Falcon is fast because he can go point five past light speed. I don't know exactly how that scale works, but it doesn't sound anywhere close to 1516 times the speed of light, which is warp factor 9. Achieving hyperspace seems to be a much more difficult and time consuming enterprise than warp speed, again implying the great disparity in technology levels.

Tie fighters? Cannon fodder against the Enterprise. I recall one of the manuals said they didn't have shields. Even if they did, it's hard to believe they could do much against a ship like the Enterprise E. It has been shown that the Enterprise can easily target multiple attackers with its phasers. It would pluck them out of space as fast as they could be sent. Star Trek phasers are aimed by those super high powered computers, not by gunnery crews physically aiming like in Star Wars.

What's all of this about Vader attacking the Enterprise with the Force? If he could do that, why were any battles at all fought in the Star Wars movies? I don't recall him ever shooting down ships with the Force, or even attacking rival captains. It's hard to believe that these tactics would be more successful against the far more advanced Star Trek ships.

If the Enterprise stood still and let the Death Star shoot it with that planet buster ray, it might have a serious problem. Otherwise, it would be like an F-18 going against a WWI biplane.

On the other hand, a Jedi with a light saber would certainly carve up a Klingon with a baleth.

SPOOFE
08-25-2000, 06:48 AM
Star Wars has no replicaters, no holodeck, no transporters, no Data level androids, and much more primitive sensors.

Incorrect. They DO have replicators... just not as fancy-shmancy as in Star Trek (in other words, food doesn't appear in a shimmer of special effects... waste material is broken down and reconstituted into viable material).

They DO have holodeck, in a sense... in The Jedi Academy Trilogy, reference is made to using holograms to create a zoo of extinct animals. The holograms seen in the movies, however, are very fuzzy and poor quality, due to encryption codes, tranmitting through enemy shields/long distances/asteroid fields/etc

They DO have transporters... in one of the comic books (I forget which series, I'll dig it up), a circus/carnival/whatever had an act that utilized transporters for entertainment (the transporter was built into a hula-hoop-sized ring, and the performer jumped through it and came out of the other ring). Transporters are not used for mass/military transit because of the possibility of transporter accidents (how many times has a crew member of the Enterprise been cloned/driven insane/lost in a transporter buffer? The things are obviously dangerous and should be banned). In addition, transporters aren't used in Star Wars because the writers of the books/comics aren't lazy asses who invented transporters because "shuttle landings are too expensive to film".

They DO have Data-level androids... in fact, they have better-than-Data-level androids. Guri, a Human Replica Droid in the book Shadows of the Empire looked, acted, talked, emoted, etc. just like a real human woman. She was so exact that a full bio-medical reading of her didn't spring any alarms that she wasn't human. And she was faster than Data, smarter, and more populaced (the reason there weren't more of them was because she was programmed to be an assassin, and she killed her maker).

Then there're droids like IG-88... he didn't look like anything other than a droid, but he was insanely fast, powerful, and intelligent. He almost killed Boba Fett (and in the Star Wars universe, that's saying a LOT). Hell, he almost conquered the galaxy. And droids with super-intelligence/super-speed/super-whatever are rather common... well, not COMMON, but no UNcommon.

Anyway, the sensors... well, there's really no basis for comparison. As far as I can tell, "sensors" are used far less as a plot gimmick in Star Wars than they are in Star Trek. Derive from that whatever you will.

Has is it established that hyperspace is faster than warp drive?

This is how... in the first couple of episodes of the Voyager series, it is said that it'd take 75 years to travel 75,000 light-years. In Star Wars, it's never been determined exactly how long it'd take to travel from one end to the other, but distance between locations that obviously are quite distant has never taken more than a week, as far as I can remember. From that, I've come up (on my own... and I've never gotten any argument) that it'd take a Star Destroyer no more than a couple months to travel the full 150,000 lightyear span of the Star Wars galaxy. And that's being VERY generous with time estimates... my very first estimates were only at a couple of weeks.

Achieving hyperspace seems to be a much more difficult and time consuming enterprise than warp speed, again implying the great disparity in technology levels.

Not so. To get into hyperspace, all you need is one big push. The trouble with hyperspace is making sure you don't run into a gravity well (traveling so fast, you can't detect the thing until you're right on top of it), which would be the equivalent of driving into a brick wall at 200 MPH. But, anyway, in hyperspace, you don't need any continued propulsion to STAY there (in The Black Fleet Crisis, they sent an escape pod with the bad guy in it into hyperspace, leaving him with no means of escape... it was pretty cool). In addition, it's been mentioned that the limits of hyperspace travel are technological rather than theoretical... you could go as fast as you want without any upper limit to your velocity, as long as your engines are good enough.

To travel in warp, you need to generate a warp field around your ship (that's what the nacelles do... which explains why every ship in the Federation follows the same basic design, 'cept the Defiant). If this warp field ever collapses, you leave warp. Seems like a very difficult way to travel, considering the warp core ALWAYS seems to go offline in a battle (in addition to phasers and hull pressure on Deck 10).

Tie fighters? Cannon fodder against the Enterprise.

TIE fighters are cannon fodder to ANYthing. That's what they're designed for, you know... cheap, expendable ships with cheap, expendable pilots (silly, silly Empire). However, the TIE fighters/interceptors are designed to take out other fighters/interceptors... it's the TIE bombers that are the real "threat" to the Enterprise. They're slow, and they have no shields, but if the full squadron of bombers can unload their missiles into the Enterprise, that's a world of hurt. In addition, Assault Gunboats and Missileboats would be dangerous, as would the Skipray blastboats, and numerous other small support ships that a Star Destroyer has in its belly.

Star Trek phasers are aimed by those super high powered computers, not by gunnery crews physically aiming like in Star Wars.

No, the huge turbolasers are aimed by computers... they're MONITORED by humans, who make sure that coolant, energy levels, power fluctuations, etc. are all kept in nominal levels. As for aiming and shooting... well, there're guys telling the guns where to shoot, yeah... but same with the Enterprise. Why else would Worf be standing behind the captain's chair at the weapons consol? (I think that's what Worf does...). Basically, it's the same sort of weapons system we have today... someone tells the computer where to shoot, and the computer does the rest.

However, smaller anti-fighter weaponry, like on the Falcon, are handled by people. It's less of a drain on computer resources to do it that way, for the small guns.

What's all of this about Vader attacking the Enterprise with the Force?

Dude, you know what, I'm not entirely sure myself. Everyone else seems to keep bringing up Vader an' all, so I just go along with it. Anyway... I, nor anyone else, has implied that Vader could use his abilities to actually sheer off a chunk of the E's hull (although, in theory, he COULD do that... the Emperor was able to conjure Force Storms that obliterated entire cities). However, Vader could supposedly get into the minds of the E's crew, figure out their plans, their capabilities, and plan accordingly. He could even alter the thoughts of the captain, if he tried. But most likely, he'd wind up doing what he does in his own personal fighter... sense what the other guy is doing and counter-attack. How else do you think Vader earned the title of "Best Starpilot in the Galaxy"? :D

It's hard to believe that these tactics would be more successful against the far more advanced Star Trek ships.

Again, they're hardly "far more advanced"... they're simply shinier.

Monster104
08-25-2000, 03:23 PM
Mmm...shiny...

vandal
08-25-2000, 05:46 PM
They DO have holodeck, in a sense... in The Jedi Academy Trilogy, reference is made to using holograms to create a zoo of extinct animals. The holograms seen in the movies, however, are very fuzzy and poor quality, due to encryption codes, tranmitting through enemy shields/long distances/asteroid fields/etc

The material produced via a holodeck is tangible (there was a great illustration of this in the last Star Trek film). The reference in the Jedi Academy Trilogy is simply a hologram, that is, non-tangible.

SPOOFE
08-25-2000, 08:11 PM
The material produced via a holodeck is tangible (there was a great illustration of this in the last Star Trek film). The reference in the Jedi Academy Trilogy is simply a hologram, that is, non-tangible.

True, but the technology to manipulate force fields exists, leading to the implication that they could create a holodeck if they wanted. I just figure that they don't, since the need for cheesy plot twists is lessened ("Oh, no, Luke's trapped on the holodeck again!") :D

tracer
08-25-2000, 08:29 PM
SPOOFE Bo Diddly wrote:

As has been mentioned several times in this (abysmally long) thread, a Star Destroyer has 8 tractor beam projectors, one of which would be far more than capable of locking the Enteprise into place.

Can they hold on to their victim if it goes into Hyperspace? (Or in the case of the Enterprise, goes to warp speed?) Can they even capture a target that's moving faster-than-light to begin with?

it's never been established that the Enterprise can fire from warp at a target that's not in warp.

It's never been established that the crew of a Star Destroyer wouldn't pour molasses all over themselves when they first sighted a Galaxy-class starship, either. I've said it before and I'll say it again: saying that the Enterprise can fire at faster-than-light targets while at warp, but not at sublight targets while at warp, is a cop-out of the highest magnitude.

In addition, the problems of attacking entirely from warp include the inability to get off more than a single shot before the E gets out of range (traveling at several times the speed of light tends to do this really quickly).

Unless they fly in a warp-speed circle around the Star Destroyer.

Finally, it's also been shown that the ISD's mode of FTL transit (via hyperspace) is much faster than warp.

True. The hyperspace cruising speed of the Kimura in one of the Thrawn books was around 25,000 times the speed of light. Warp 9 is only a paltry 1,000 times the speed of light, and even that is well above the maximum sustainable cruising speed of the Enterprise-D.

Star Destroyers certainly do target vital areas of a ship. Case in point: At the very beginning of Episode IV: A New Hope the Devastator manages to get a direct hit on the Tantive IV's main communications dish. Just because you never saw a Star Destroyer do this in any of the movies doesn't mean it CAN'T.
[Emphasis mine.]

Ooh, I really wish you'd apply this same reasoning to the Enterprise shooting at a sublight target while the Enterprise was at warp.

And finally, the shields on the ISD are hardly as important as they are on the Enterprise. The E would, quite literally, fall apart if it didn't have its' energy fields surrounding it. The ISD is designed for incredibly powerful hull strength, and would require several photon torpedo blasts to puncture very deeply into the hull.

Some of the Star Destroyer's "hull strength" probably comes from its particle shields (from the paltry descriptions I could find about particle shields in the various Star Wars sourcebooks, they seem to be analogous to the "structural integrity fields" on the Enterprise-D). But I agree that, unshielded, the Star Destroyer would still be much, much tougher than the Enterprise-D, if only from its sheer mass.

Not that the Star Destroyer could ever score a hit on the Enterprise-D, if the crew of the Enterprise-D knew the Star Destroyer only had sublight weaponry and expected it to be hostile. :p

SPOOFE
08-25-2000, 09:29 PM
Star Destroyers certainly do target vital areas of a ship. Case in point: At the very beginning of Episode IV: A New Hope the Devastator manages to get a direct hit on the Tantive IV's main communications dish. Just because you never saw a Star Destroyer do this in any of the movies doesn't mean it CAN'T.

[Emphasis mine.]

Ooh, I really wish you'd apply this same reasoning to the Enterprise shooting at a sublight target while the Enterprise was at warp.

You misunderstood me, Tracer. It HAS been shown in the numerous novels and comic books that a Star Destroyer (or Mon Cal cruiser, or Nebulon-B Frigate, or what-have-you) can select different sections of an enemy ship to aim for and fire at. I said that just because that this wasn't explicitly used/mentioned in the three movies, it doesn't mean that it hasn't been said that, yes, a Star Destroyers' targeting sensors can lock onto smaller targets on a ships' surface.

However, this tactic would probably be seldom used, since the sheer amount of weaponry a Star Destroyer possesses would probably prove to be far more than enough to overwhelm its target with a general salvo, a tactic which would be quicker. Remember, this is a ship with a hundred guns, instead of a mere handful.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: saying that the Enterprise can fire at faster-than-light targets while at warp, but not at sublight targets while at warp, is a cop-out of the highest magnitude.

Not so much a cop-out as it's a desire to eliminate all undefinable variables (which is one of the reasons I've tried to keep Vader and such out of the argument... unfortunately, the Dark Lord keeps getting dragged back in! Curses!). Besides, I thought that the "drop out of warp-fire-return to warp" tactic would have been just as good, and we know for sure that the Enterprise would be able to do this.

I just wanted to put down the "The Enterprise can fire from warp so it automatically wins" argument :D

Unless they fly in a warp-speed circle around the Star Destroyer.

True, true. Again, however, it seems like it wouldn't make much difference if they did in-warp/out-warp hit and run tactics.

tracer
08-26-2000, 09:32 PM
<rant mode>

Or the Enterprise-D could do the "Picard Maneuver." :rolleyes:

Bleah. The Picard Maneuver was one of the biggest treknology brain-farts that have ever come out of the show's writing staff. We know the Enterprise, and all other ships in the Star Trek universe, have faster-than-light sensors. We know these would be used in combat -- even in sublight combat, knowing where your enemy is right now instead of where he was a fraction of a second ago is tremendously useful. Yet the only way the Picard Maneuver can work is if the enemy's sensors work at the speed of light or slower.

What were they smokin' when they wrote that episode anyway?!

</rant mode>

carnivorousplant
08-26-2000, 09:43 PM
Originally posted by SPOOFE Bo Diddly

It HAS been shown in the numerous novels and comic books that a Star Destroyer

Question. Doe SW have a definition of canon? To be 'real' in ST, something must have occured on a TV series, in a movie, or in a few books written by producers. Comic book and your basic 'Star Trek book' don't count.

Thanks

SPOOFE
08-27-2000, 04:25 AM
Question. Doe SW have a definition of canon? To be 'real' in ST, something must have occured on a TV series, in a movie, or in a few books written by producers. Comic book and your basic 'Star Trek book' don't count.

If you only want to include the stuff that's been in the movies, then we know absolutely dick about what a Star Destroyers' abilities are. However, most non-movie material that was brought up before Timothy Zahn wrote Heir To The Empire, Dark Storm Rising, and The Last Command are usually ignored in favor of more recent developments. That was the point where George Lucas gave permission for other people to make official additions to the Star Wars universe. Before that, all non-trilogy resources that were available were the Ewok Stores and the Adventures of Threepio and Artoo (well, okay, that's not what it was really called, but you get the idea).

Whereas Star Trek has, what, nine movies and four series, making a total of hundreds of hours of TV, for reference material? Hence the difference in canonical standards :D

Doubleclick
10-06-2000, 02:44 PM
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire.html

Go there...that will explain everything...not for the light of heart either.

This site tries to use REAL science to expain how things could done in both universes. (This doesn't mean that it can happen, but it takes observations from the movies and applies real science to them.)

IE: The DS destroyes Alderan. For that to happen an unfathomable amount of energy would be needed. But, since it happened on the big screen, it is taken that it DID happen then tried to explain what would be needed for it to happen.

I've read a few posts here about 'how an ISD is bigger, therefore...' and ' the Enterprise's shilds can.." and so on...

Read this site right to the end...you'll be surprised of the things that you never took into account. =)

SPOOFE
10-06-2000, 06:50 PM
Doubleclick, you just earned fifty SPOOFE points (but keep in mind, they're worthless :D).

The site (although very, very biased in favor of a Star Destroyer) goes to great, excruciating pains to "prove" Star Wars technology to be superior to Star Trek. While some equations are questionable, they often provide several cites of source material that all support each other.

Today, I have seen the light... there ARE people with less of a life than me!! :D

carnivorousplant
10-06-2000, 09:34 PM
Picard peered at the viewscreen.
"Mr. Data, increase magnification. Numba one, can you make it out?"

"It's a sign, Sir."

"A SIGN?" demanded Picard.

"Yessir. 'Do Not Feed The Aminals'"

:)

Note to moderators: We need a pointey eared smiley.

Vahktang
10-12-2000, 08:56 PM
If anything, the Ďscienceí in SW is worse than ST Ė and thatís saying a lot.
Some bad science examples:
Star Trek:
You hold you breath when you encounter vacuum.

Star Wars:
Spice is a something you mine.

Both: you have windows on spaceships!

But, letís just run some agreeable numbers, because, Ďnumbers mean thingsí. We donít have to make any non-logical assumptions.
Letís look at living space for a moment:
According to the tech manuals, the Enterprise can hold about 1000 people, a 640 m craft, while the Imperial Star Destroyers can hold 45,000, a 1600 m long craft.
Now letís run some math and talk about verifiables.
We know the interior or the Enterprise, which is quite lush, but not the ISD's.
So, using a simple algebra technique:
to get even half the same living/working/playing space the Federation people have, the Imperials have to be short. About 30 cm tall.


More later,

Vahktang

But the big question is who is Anikan (Darth Vader) Skywalkerís dad. Easy. Paul Atraides.

carnivorousplant
10-12-2000, 09:42 PM
Originally posted by Vahktang
But the big question is who is Anikan (Darth Vader) Skywalkerís dad. Easy. Paul Atraides.


Naw, the important question is:

Who would win in a fight, Paul Atraides or Captain Kirk?

:)

SPOOFE
10-13-2000, 05:39 AM
Star Wars:
Spice is a something you mine.

Don't confuse "Spice" with "spice". "spice" (with a lower-case S) is the stuff we put in spaghetti sauce here on earth. "Spice" (with an upper-case S) is a slang term for a drug that happens to be mined. Just like how aspirin and heroin are both "drugs".

Both: you have windows on spaceships!

How the hell is that wrong? There're windows on the space shuttle, aren't there? There've been windows on spacefaring vessels since the Russians put the first cosmonaut in orbit. (Of course, I would like to point out that in both sci-fi series, "windows" aren't made of glass or plastic, but transparent metals).

So, using a simple algebra technique:
to get even half the same living/working/playing space the Federation people have, the Imperials have to be short. About 30 cm tall.

That's correct, if both ships were one-dimensional. However, not only is a Star Destroyer about 2.5X longer, it's also wider and taller. In addition, the Enterprise's shape is very odd... it doesn't "fill up" as much as the Star Destroyer does. In short, a Star Destroyer, while only 2.5X (roughly) the length of the Enterprise, has far more than 2.5X the volume.

We know the interior or the Enterprise, which is quite lush, but not the ISD's.

Actually, we do know the interior of an ISD. It was presented to us in the Incredible Cross-Sections book (which also has an incredibly stunning cross-section display of the friggin' Death Star... it's HUGE, man, HUGE!)

But the big question is who is Anikan (Darth Vader) Skywalkerís dad. Easy. Paul Atraides.

Nope. Anakin's dad was the shit pulled out of George Lucas's ass (a "virgence" in the Force? "midichlorians"?!?!? What was he thinking?!?!?)

Vahktang
10-13-2000, 01:05 PM
Star Wars:
Spice is a something you mine.


Don't confuse "Spice" with "spice". "spice" (with a lower-case S) is the stuff we put in spaghetti sauce here on earth. "Spice" (with an upper-case S) is a slang term for a drug that happens to be mined. Just like how aspirin and heroin are both "drugs".

I donít get this. We mine aspirin and heroin?
Whatís next, the minerals we take for our health are actual minerals? :)
But seriously folks Ė Spice (with an upper-case S) is actually a drug slang term? By who? Where did this come from, the same no-prizer that came up with the Kessel run/parsec explanation?
-----------------------------------------
quote:

Both: you have windows on spaceships!


How the hell is that wrong? There're windows on the space shuttle, aren't there? There've been windows on spacefaring vessels since the Russians put the first cosmonaut in orbit. (Of course, I would like to point out that in both sci-fi series, "windows" aren't made of glass or plastic, but transparent metals).

Oh boy. Sigh.
First, you donít put something as valuable as the bridge near the vulnerable outer deck of a space ship
Second, what can a bridge crew possibly see with the naked eye that they could not perceive better with instruments?
Third, we have windows on the shuttle because a) tradition and emotion, b) it is also an atmospheric craft, not only a space craft. Space craft donít need windows, and, as a matter of fact, should not have them.
Transparent metal does not enter into it.
----------------------------------------
quote:

So, using a simple algebra technique:
to get even half the same living/working/playing space the Federation people have, the Imperials have to be short. About 30 cm tall.


That's correct, if both ships were one-dimensional. However, not only is a Star Destroyer about 2.5X longer, it's also wider and taller. In addition, the Enterprise's shape is very odd... it doesn't "fill up" as much as the Star Destroyer does. In short, a Star Destroyer, while only 2.5X (roughly) the length of the Enterprise, has far more than 2.5X the volume.

OK
Double the size, eight times the volume, right?
So the ISP can handle 10,000 people, easy. Not 45,000. Unless theyíre short.
-------------------------------------------
quote:

We know the interior or the Enterprise, which is quite lush, but not the ISD's.


Actually, we do know the interior of an ISD. It was presented to us in the Incredible Cross-Sections book (which also has an incredibly stunning cross-section display of the friggin' Death Star... it's HUGE, man, HUGE!)

Sorry, a reference I donít have access to, Iíll take your word on it. But, do they happen to mention a scale on the legend? One that we can relate to?
We know that ST people are normal size because historical figures have come through with no discernable size difference.
--------------------------------------------
quote:

But the big question is who is Anikan (Darth Vader) Skywalkerís dad. Easy. Paul Atraides.


Nope. Anakin's dad was the shit pulled out of George Lucas's ass (a "virgence" in the Force? "midichlorians"?!?!? What >was he thinking?!?!?)
___________________________________________________________________
You aintít kidding. Pissed me off. Force should not be measurable by an instrument. You just feel it.

More later,

Vahktang


HI: What would a pantheist yell during sex?

"Hey Everybody- Look at me!!"

Vahktang
10-13-2000, 01:11 PM
Re: Quantifiables

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Vahktang
But the big question is who is Anikan (Darth Vader) Skywalkerís dad. Easy. Paul Atraides.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Naw, the important question is:

Who would win in a fight, Paul Atraides or Captain Kirk?


______________________________________
Easy. Paul.

More psychic type powers.
Has that shield thingy that stops everything except slow blows - and when Kirk is slow it's not in battle.
Tougher - the new Freman regimene and diet

but, the number one reason why Paul would win:

Better written.
I am certain Ellison would agree.

More later,

Vahktang

Geoff of the 82nd
10-15-2000, 10:34 PM
Man, you people sure know how to keep a post going long. I read about half of it, then just gave up. Anyway, I find that Star Trek is slightly more advanced as compared to Star Wars, but the real difference between the two is that Star Wars is more magical and fantasy-oriented, whereas Star Trek has been more tacnologically oriented since the get-go. I sincerely doubt by any means that these 2 universes would clash any time soon (unless Q somehow warps them into the same place for some reason). Well, I'll post more later.

SPOOFE
10-16-2000, 03:19 AM
I donít get this. We mine aspirin and heroin?
Whatís next, the minerals we take for our health are actual minerals?

You miss the point. Just because it's called "spice" doesn't mean that it's really "the spice that we're familiar with in our day to day lives here on Earth". If you were to smoke a roach, you wouldn't expect it to have six legs and a crunchy shell, would you?

But seriously folks Ė Spice (with an upper-case S) is actually a drug slang term? By who?

Who came up with the idea to call marijuana "pot"? The earliest I can think of its consistent use right now was in Kevin J. Anderson's Jedi Academy Trilogy, but I have no doubt that other writers' have used it before him. In addition, the equivalent to us "hacking into a computer" is, in Star Wars, called "slicing". And the word "stang" is a swearword (originating from Alderaan, actually). As are "Sithspawn", "Sithspit", or any number of other colorful phrases incorporating the word "Sith".

Where did this come from, the same no-prizer that came up with the Kessel run/parsec explanation?

No-prizer? I find it "no-prizer" to point to the so-called Parsec flaw. The Kessel Run flies by a black hole cluster. If you get too close, you get sucked in. The faster you're going, the closer you can get. The closer you get, the shorter the Run is. Why is a corollary between speed and distance so hard to understand?

First, you donít put something as valuable as the bridge near the vulnerable outer deck of a space ship

Why not? The ships' sensors are situated on the outermost part of the ship (to avoid getting interference from the ship itself). If the Bridge were placed a significant distance away from these sensors, the likelihood of the connection between Bridge and sensors being disrupted increases. If the Bridge and sensors were right next to each other, there's a shorter distance of connection cables/plasma conduits/whatevers, thus making a lower likelihood of disconnection. If they lose sensors during a battle, Star Wars or Star Trek, they're screwed.

[quoote]Second, what can a bridge crew possibly see with the naked eye that they could not perceive better with instruments?[/quote]

In the cases of both Star Wars and Star Trek, the main view panels also act as large television screens (this was demonstrated, for SW at least, in Timothy Zahn's Thrawn trilogy). In short, it provides the sensors an output for which to transmit data readily to the Bridge crew's eyes.

Space craft donít need windows, and, as a matter of fact, should not have them.

Forgive my skepticism, but I highly doubt that you're an authority figure on spacecraft. Moreover, I highly doubt that you've had any consultation with authority figures of that sort. As such, I'm very hesitant to give this claim any sort of credence.

Double the size, eight times the volume, right?
So the ISP can handle 10,000 people, easy. Not 45,000. Unless theyíre short.

Take a look at the Enterprise. If it were place in a box, the vast majority of that box would be empty space. If a Star Destroyer were placed in a box, there'd be significantly less empty space.

In addition, the ISD is a more efficient design, volume-wise. The only really bulky section of the Enterprise is the saucer section. Everything side from that is very small... the neck can't be more than a few dozen meters wide.

In short, you have to look at ALL the dimensions of a vessel to determine the volume. An ISD is much longer, much wider, and much taller, and takes up more space per dimension than the Enterprise does.

Also, keep in mind that the Enterprise is a diplomatic vessel, while the ISD is an instrument of war. As a diplomatic vessel, more of the space on the Enterprise will go over towards comfort and luxuries, while the quarters in an ISD will be significantly more spartan.

But, do they happen to mention a scale on the legend? One that we can relate to?
We know that ST people are normal size because historical figures have come through with no discernable size difference.

You answered your own question. I believe you'd be surprised to find out how many people can be squeezed into a kilometer. :D

Anyway, I find that Star Trek is slightly more advanced as compared to Star Wars

It's shinier, most definitely, but just about all the technologies in Star Trek (replicators, teleporters, etc. etc.) have been duplicated to some degree in Star Wars, the main difference between the two being that SW has a much grungier take on such things than ST. (For example, the only mention I've found of teleporters being used in SW was as an act in a traveling theatre group. Apparently, the commonality of SW peoples have decided that teleportation is too dangerous... and given the amount of transporter mishaps that happen in Star Trek, I'm inclined to agree with them).

In addition, SW greatly exceeds ST technology in several areas: Hyperspace, a much faster form of travel than warp; the common proliferation of Data-level artificial intelligences; shield technology, which has shown to be more reliable than those in ST (where a ship very often gets damaged before the shields are even halfway depleted); communication, such as the Holo-net, which provides instantaneous communication anywhere in the galaxy. In fact, about the only category that ST seems to beat SW out appears to be multitasking... each ship seems capable of emitting hundreds of different energy fields, and apparently, the ships' main sensor dish can be used for an endless number of purposes :D

but the real difference between the two is that Star Wars is more magical and fantasy-oriented, whereas Star Trek has been more tacnologically oriented since the get-go.

Well, yes and no. It really depends on which episode/aspect of the series you're talking about. Surely, in Star Wars, there's a huge emphasis on The Force (life energy, blah blah blah), but the difference between fantastic and technological aspects in Star Wars are generally very clear-cut... never the twain shall meet, that sort of thing. In Star Trek, the technology and fantasy are continually intertwined, and the blend together (sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse). So it's not a matter of one series having more of something than the other, it's how each aspect is handled.

(As I press the Reply button, I take note that this post is pretty damn long...)

Vahktang
10-16-2000, 03:41 PM
My comment:
Space craft donít need windows, and, as a matter of fact, should not have them.

His comment:
Forgive my skepticism, but I highly doubt that you're an authority figure on spacecraft. Moreover, I highly doubt that you've had any consultation with authority figures of that sort. As such, I'm very hesitant to give this claim any sort of credence.

My reply:
My apologies. I did not realize that one had to be an authority figure to use logic.
And I did not realize that experts or those that consult with experts are the only ones who can post here.
Iíll leave quietly.

No more later,

Vahktang

Vahktang
10-16-2000, 03:49 PM
My comment:
Space craft donít need windows, and, as a matter of fact, should not have them.

His comment:
Forgive my skepticism, but I highly doubt that you're an authority figure on spacecraft. Moreover, I highly doubt that you've had any consultation with authority figures of that sort. As such, I'm very hesitant to give this claim any sort of credence.

My reply:
My apologies. I did not realize that one had to be an authority figure to use logic.
And I did not realize that experts or those that consult with experts are the only ones who can post here.
Iíll leave quietly.

No more later,

Vahktang

Vahktang
10-16-2000, 03:55 PM
My comment:
Space craft donít need windows, and, as a matter of fact, should not have them.

His comment:
Forgive my skepticism, but I highly doubt that you're an authority figure on spacecraft. Moreover, I highly doubt that you've had any consultation with authority figures of that sort. As such, I'm very hesitant to give this claim any sort of credence.

My reply:
My apologies. I did not realize that one had to be an authority figure to use logic.
And I did not realize that experts or those that consult with experts are the only ones who can post here.
Iíll leave quietly.

No more later,

Vahktang

SPOOFE
10-16-2000, 06:05 PM
My apologies. I did not realize that one had to be an authority figure to use logic.
And I did not realize that experts or those that consult with experts are the only ones who can post here.

Oh, stop whining. You claim that spacecraft don't need windows, when reality shows that, yes, they do. Don't make claims that you have no way of backing up, even in a thread that deals with fiction.

Geoff of the 82nd
10-16-2000, 08:22 PM
Damn straight.

Vahktang
10-17-2000, 01:56 PM
quote:
My apologies. I did not realize that one had to be an authority figure to use logic.
And I did not realize that experts or those that consult with experts are the only ones who can post here.

Oh, stop whining. You claim that spacecraft don't need windows, when reality shows that, yes, they do. Don't make claims that you have no way of backing up, even in a thread that deals with fiction.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>Good. Cool. Thanks.

> And I back up my arguments with logic, math, reason, resources, observation, deduction, etc.
Just like experts would.
> Now, there donít seem to be any experts on this planet on kilometer and a half, hyperdrive driven, tie fighter holding star craft.
> So my opinion is as good as any and better than most.
> Star craft donít need windows and should not have them except in a decorative capacity, which donít belong on a bridge.
> To comment upon your points (as comments upon my points)

quote:
First, you donít put something as valuable as the bridge near the vulnerable outer deck of a space ship

Why not?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> If the bridge gets taken out, youíre in deep kimshi.
> If it is on the hull, it is much easier to take out.
> If it has hulls, decks, bulkheads between it and what is shooting at them, it is much harder to take out.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The ships' sensors are situated on the outermost part of the ship (to avoid getting interference from the ship itself). If the Bridge were placed a significant distance away from these sensors, the likelihood of the connection between Bridge and sensors being disrupted increases.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> The ship is a kilometer and a half long. The bridge is already Ďa significant distance away from these sensorsí. If the bridge was more centrally located, disruption likelihood would decrease.
> Why? A shot takes out part of the hull and some connections 10 meters from the bridge. The sensors linked to that connection are lost.
> Central bridge. Hull shot as above, no loss because the connections are behind decks and bulkheads away from the hull.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
If the Bridge and sensors were right next to each other, there's a shorter distance of connection cables/plasma conduits/whatevers, thus making a lower likelihood of disconnection.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> The signals between the sensors and the viewscreens, whatevers travel at lightspeed or faster. Distance at this size is not a factor.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
If they lose sensors during a battle, Star Wars or Star Trek, they're screwed.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>If they lose sensors during a battle you are screwed, window or not. What are you going to tell the gunnery officer:
ďShoot over there. More to the right.Ē
ďUh, your right or my right, sir?Ē
ďMy right, or course.Ē
ďMissed.Ē
>Continue until you are destroyed or sensors are fixed.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
[quoote]Second, what can a bridge crew possibly see with the naked eye that they could not perceive better with instruments?

>You didnít answer this point.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

In the cases of both Star Wars and Star Trek, the main view panels also act as large television screens (this was demonstrated, for SW at least, in Timothy Zahn's Thrawn trilogy). In short, it provides the sensors an output for which to transmit data readily to the Bridge crew's eyes.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> So it is a sensor screen. Good. Why is it a window? Why is the bridge on the hull when it would be safer, make more sense to put it on the interior of the ship.

> So, I put it to you:
> Why put the bridge on the hull on a starship?
> Why put a window on the bridge?

> Remember, this is science, logic, etc.

>On to other things:
quote:
I donít get this. We mine aspirin and heroin?
Whatís next, the minerals we take for our health are actual minerals?

You miss the point. Just because it's called "spice" doesn't mean that it's really "the spice that we're familiar with in our day to day lives here on Earth". If you were to smoke a roach, you wouldn't expect it to have six legs and a crunchy shell, would you?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Yes, I did. I had a little smiley face after my comment. And my next comment was:
______________________________________________________________________________
quote:
But seriously folks Ė Spice (with an upper-case S) is actually a drug slang term? By who?

Who came up with the idea to call marijuana "pot"? The earliest I can think of its consistent use right now was in Kevin J. Anderson's Jedi Academy Trilogy, but I have no doubt that other writers' have used it before him. In addition, the equivalent to us "hacking into a computer" is, in Star Wars, called "slicing". And the word "stang" is a swearword (originating from Alderaan, actually). As are "Sithspawn", "Sithspit", or any number of other colorful phrases incorporating the word "Sith".
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Youíre right. I bow to your superior knowledge and resources on this.
_____________________________________________________________________________
quote:
Where did this come from, the same no-prizer that came up with the Kessel run/parsec explanation?

No-prizer? I find it "no-prizer" to point to the so-called Parsec flaw. The Kessel Run flies by a black hole cluster. If you get too close, you get sucked in. The faster you're going, the closer you can get. The closer you get, the shorter the Run is. Why is a corollary between speed and distance so hard to understand?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

> Because the usage is not normal, and the example is exceptional.
> Would one say that one could get from Point A to Point B by using all these secret shortcuts that only I know in X miles or under Y time?
> I can get from Hartford to Boston in 132 miles or under two hours?

> A no-prize was invented by Stan Lee of Marvel comics. It is a compliment to fans who come up with logical explanations for mistakes made by the writers, artists, etc of the comic books.
> We all know that Lucas gaffed when he wrote about the Kessel Run. But the explanation finally given is acceptable and we now do so.
___________________________________________________________________________________
quote:
Double the size, eight times the volume, right?
So the ISP can handle 10,000 people, easy. Not 45,000. Unless theyíre short.


Take a look at the Enterprise. If it were place in a box, the vast majority of that box would be empty space. If a Star Destroyer were placed in a box, there'd be significantly less empty space.

In addition, the ISD is a more efficient design, volume-wise. The only really bulky section of the Enterprise is the saucer section. Everything side from that is very small... the neck can't be more than a few dozen meters wide.

In short, you have to look at ALL the dimensions of a vessel to determine the volume. An ISD is much longer, much wider, and much taller, and takes up more space per dimension than the Enterprise does.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

>I got this from http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire.html
>If you know a better source with better numbers, just plug those in:
________________________________________________________________
However, a lone ISD is still an impressive sight for primitive cultures, who are generally incapable of constructing a vessel on that scale ... Its length is approximately 1600 metres, and its volume is approximately 9E7 m≥.
___________________________________________________________________
> According to my handy dandy HP calculator, if we divide the volume by the number of crew and passengers (45,000) then give them a 3 m ceiling (not unreasonable, as we have seen) we get a personal space of 26 m X 26 m.
> Pace it off sometime.
> Then put in that space where you sleep, where you eat, where you work, where you entertain or are entertained. Then put where your food is prepared, where the raw materials are stored (for six years), the parts of the engine that move you, keep your air circulating, your wastes recycling. Then add the corridors that lead to all that and more that I did not comment on.
> Not much space to live in, is it?
__________________________________________________________________________
quote:

But, do they happen to mention a scale on the legend? One that we can relate to?
We know that ST people are normal size because historical figures have come through with no discernable size difference.
You answered your own question. I believe you'd be surprised to find out how many people can be squeezed into a kilometer.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> I did? So there is a relatable scale on the legend of the SW diagram.
And I am aware just how many people one can comfortably squeeze into a kilometer cubed. Asimov did a rather good story on that once.


More later,

Vahktang


PS - And I will no longer post things three times. Sorry.


PPS - Can we get entered into some Ďnet award category as Ďnerdiest thing on the Ďnetí?

Badtz Maru
10-17-2000, 05:43 PM
I think in a boarding action the Federation would kick ass. Compare the hand weapons - those stormtroopers have guns the size of a small carbine or a large SMG that shoot bolts that punch holes in things. Princess Leia was hit by one and survived. The Federation has tiny pistols that make you glow and then disappear. No contest.

Lazlo
10-17-2000, 08:14 PM
I read through the first 4 pages and then jumped to the last page.

I want to bring up something that I don't think's been discussed (unless it was in the last 4 pages).

Accuracy.

Of the respective weapons, not this thread.

In the SW movies, the blasters / turbo lasers miss a lot. In STTNG, I can't remember the Enterprise ever missing it's target. I may be wrong about that, though.

OT: That explanation of the Kessel run / parsec goof is pretty good. Nice way to cover for some writer (*cough*Lucas*cough*) who can't be bothered to research the meaning of a word. I'm surprised that he didn't use light-year as a measure of time.

Sorry, but Jar-Jar Binks and the Ewoks left me hating Lucas.