This isn’t a question about facts as much as it is about imagination. There’s this long-lasting argument going about which vessel would win in a fight, the U.S.S. Enterprise-D or an Imperial-Class Star Destroyer. My stance is that the ISD would prevail, due to over-all size, a MUCH greater abundance of weaponry, and the fact that it’s a warship while the Enterprise is a diplomacy vessel. But I want to get the opinions of all o’ you personages on this one.
-SPOOFE
The only appropriate answer is that Gandalf would kick both their asses.
The star destroyer definitely is bigger, but the technologies of the two universes are completely different. Does the destroyer have shields? Which one’s weapons have the greatest range? Which ship is faster?
Also, I think that the most effective way to fight in the Star Trek universe, assuming that the opponents doesn’t have the shields to prevent it, is to simply transport a bunch of explosives over to the other ship.
Yes, the ISD has shields (particle and ray), the Enterprise has longer range and better speed, unless you take into account the ISD’s hyperdrive, but that’s not a very precise means of movement.
-SPOOFE
I have a question: How mindless and pointless does a topic have to be before it’s moved?
Work is the curse of the drinking classes. (Oscar Wilde)
Well Bibliophage, I smell the distinct aroma of MPSIMS.
So are they shields in the Star Trek sense? Would they stop a teleporter?
Then I guess the Enterprise could just continually stay out of range, although the Federation seems to have hang-ups about “cheap” moves like that.
No brainer: the good guys would win. This is Hollywood ain’t it.*
Peace.
*ST is produced by Paramount.
I say GD.
OK… did you see the Millenium Falcon go up against one of those Star Destroyers… even Han Solo didn’t actually intend to fight the thing. As c3po mentioned, the odds are practically impossible. I bring this up, because I imagine the Falcon and the Enterprise are probably fairly similar in size. (Just remember… the Falcon compared to the thing was able to drift away with the star destroyers huge garbage-- and its lazers didn’t even harm the thing.) End result-- Vader uses the force to squash poor ol’ Kirk to oblivian. Absolutely no doubts
Screeme
Enterprise vs. Star Destroyer
also known as When Nerds Attack!
Gypsy: Tom, I don’t get you.
Tom Servo: Nobody does. I’m the wind, baby.
Well GoodGuys theory aside, and working from the assumption that both have shields…
I think the sheer size of the destroyer plus the fact that it has fighters capable of wearing down the enterprises shield (and rather quickly when you consider the mass of tie fighters they could put out against it).
Of course the trekkers would be quite devious and could always reverse the flux capacitors.
But what if it came down to mano-mano. A group of friends and I recently had a debate centering around trek characters v wars characters. The trek characters fared very well in all facets except against jedi/sith. Between the jedi mind trick and superior reflexes we found the only one who could stand alone was Data whose reflexes make him able to weild a light sabre very well (we assume) and whose sheer weight prevent him from being telekinetcially moved.
Of course that wouldn’t help him if an ISD blew the Enterprise to smithereens…
Okay, I’ll put aside the fact that this question has an inanity quotient of 99%. Let’s look at some facts.
In Star Wars, the weapons were intended to destroy ships. (Actually, the same goes for Battlestar Gallactica.) In Star Trek, the weapons could theoretically roast a planet. (Consider the minimalistic effects in the episode “A Piece of the Action”.)
Quite frankly, Star Trek makes no sense. They encounter spacial anomalies of various intensities, but they always seem to survive with a few bruises and burns. The universe just isn’t like that. You can be pelted with a potato gun or blasted by a hydrogen bomb. How is it that they always seem to be tossed about in such a limited range of damage?
This is all fantasy, folks. It’s all good fun, but we know that if Voyager could create all that antimatter that it could annihilate an entire planet.
These shows are not about logic, but about philosophy. They make some effort to incorporate science into their shows because science is part of our lives, but we can’t assume that the writers REALLY know what they’re talking about. Nor should we
expect them to, because they have other
fish to fry.
So we “suspend disbelief” and ask ourselves about other questions. For example: would we be better off pursuing the “Borg” concept of perfection, or should we look towards the idea that we have to progress towards a higher level? If I’m not being too redundant, are the Borg locked into a stagnant paradigm, or are the Star Trek representation of humans moving towards something similar to what the “Q” have accomplished?
It is foolish to try to predict where our technology will go. I think that certain science fiction shows work just because they place aside the technological aspect in a blaze of “technobabble”. What is more important: the means or the end?
Let’s not confuse mythopoetical expression with prophecy.
Are you educated, erudite and maybe a bit eccentric?
Please help us test a new web game!
Y’know, there’s an actual episode of TNG where Worf and the rest of the bridge crew comment, jokingly on the effect of “Laser Weapons” on the Enterprise’s shield. The laser weapons is in quotes because of the very disdainful tone of voice Worf used to describe what they were being attacked with. Apparently, lasers do not have any significant effect on the shields of a Federation starship.
Now, a quick look into the Star Wars technical specs that West End Games put out a few years ago, lists the armament of a Victory class Imperial Star Destroyer as 10 Quad Turbolaser batteries, 40 Double Turbolaser batteries, and 80 Concussion Missile launchers. (It also lists the size of the Victory class at 900 meters long.) Tie Fighters are listed at 6.3 meters with 2 fire-linked Laser cannons.
Now, the U.S.S. Enterprise D is listed in the Star Trek Technical manual at 641 meters in length and 470 meters wide. (Nowhere near the Millenium Falcons tiny 26.7 meters, btw.) The same manual lists it’s 12 Type-X phasers and 3 rapid fire burst photon torpedo tubes. It carries nowhere near as many weapons as the ISD. However, the real strength comes in the Shield Generators, which are listed as having a 2,700,000 teraJoule output.
Given the Enterprises apparent immunity (or at least immense resistance) to laser weapons, I’ve got to give this fight to the Enterprise every time. The situation only becomes worse for the Empire if you figure in a fleet v. fleet combat, or upgrade to the Enterprise E.
(OH MY GOD, I NEVER REALIZE HOW BIG OF A NERD I REALLY AM!!!) 
A surprisingly easy question. To wit: In Star Trek: The Next Generation, There is a particular episode (sorry, I don’t know the title) in which the enterprise crew is attacked by a primitive vessel using laser weapons. This is commented on by lt. Worf, “captian, they are targeting us with LASER weapons (scoff)” The ships weapons have absolutely no effect on the Enterprise’s shields.
On the other side of the equation, in all three movies, the crew and officers of the ISDs refer to their primary weapons as turbolasers.
In other words, Darth Vader and crew would attack the Enterprise with great gusto, firing all of their weapons and having ABSOLUTELY NO EFFECT. (Vader would be furious, probably choke out three or four random officers) Most likely, the Enterprise wouldn’t even bother to counterattack.
Possible swerve, Vader’s powers don’t seem to work at range, (If they did, then why is Yoda still alive?), however, vader can use his powers on an image. (see Empre strikes back) So, when Picard hailed the executor, Vader could choke him out.
Not wanting to get nerdy but have to reply to your cop-out answers re lasers (I should point out I AM a trekkie and do remember that episode but quibbling about semantic definitions isn’t addressing the debate fairly).
For a start it has been addressed in the past (I will supply reference when I get the time) that Star Wars weapons aren’t ‘lasers’ as we know them. The blasters they use are energy-based weapons but not 20th century lasers. So let’s not quibble over exact types - let’s assume they’re working from the same physics realm if this debate is to continue.
Um, while it may have come up on some message board somewhere, none of the official or even the semi-official Star Wars source material I have ever seen makes any sort of distinction between a Turbolaser and a regular, old-fashioned one.
As for working from the same physics, I had thought that’s what we were doing by comparing references to lasers with lasers from the other series. Now if you mean, ‘Let’s put them on equal technological footing but leave everything else the same’ then certainley the ISD is going to win just based on sheer number of weapons; but I don’t think that’s what the original question was about.
Star Trek technology is leaps and bounds ahead of the Star Wars equivalents in pretty much every way. (Excepting the force, which is more of a magic effect anyway).
[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Timothy Campbell:
**Okay, I’ll put aside the fact that this question has an inanity quotient of 99%. Let’s look at some facts.
Funny, my calculator came up with 99.002234566744%
Can’t for the life of me figure out where the massive difference originates. Is my calculator inane? Insane? Arrggghh!
JJ
You know, a powerful laser should be a useful weapon against Star Trek ships, because the one thing not affected by their shields is visible light. General Products hulls have the same problem.
A cloaking device would be a useful defence though. Did they ever explain why they can look out from a cloaked ship? The old Invisible Man had better physics there - the eyes were not invisible, otherwise he can’t see.
I think we should only consider what is on the screen not what has been written in novels or tech manuals. What have we seen of the star destroyers’ weapons and shields? Very little. In SW an ISD blasted a chunk of Leia’s ship and disabled it. When the Falcon escaped form the space port and was being pursued by two ISD
even at point blank range the destroyers were not able to disable the falcon only weaken it’s shields. In Jedi one A-wing fighter collided with a Super Star Destroyer
and damaged it enough that it collided with the Death Star 2. The shields in SW are not effective because we constantly see fighters weave in and out at close ranges to the hull without being bothered by shields around the vessels. The fighters in the SW universe are just too small to generate the power necessary to affect large ships. Especially if they are shielded as in the Trek universe.