# The Enterprise VS. Star-Destroyer **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [January 20, 2011, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-enterprise-vs-star-destroyer/568274 "2011-01-20T02:32:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Raguleader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/258eb7/32.png) [@Raguleader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raguleader)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2011, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-enterprise-vs-star-destroyer/568274/61 "2011-01-20T23:10:58Z")
> [@GargoyleWB](#): > > Each platform has critical design flaws: > > Galactica: Flammable, one dropped cigarette in the docking bay and the whole ship is at risk. > Enterprise: No seatbelts or circuit breakers > Star Destroyer: Single-pane bay window on the flight deck Also, let’s consider each ship’s very dangerous superweapon: The Enterprise: The Kirk Smirk and the ripped shirt (twofer!) Star Destroyer: Vader’s Force Choke (Even works while teleconferencing!) Galactica: The Adama Death Glare ---
**Author:** ![AClockworkMelon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aclockworkmelon/32/10803_2.png) [@AClockworkMelon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AClockworkMelon)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2011, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-enterprise-vs-star-destroyer/568274/62 "2011-01-20T23:23:35Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > Makes sense. Either way, him being weaker than Luke means that, if Luke couldn’t do what was proposed in the post I was originally responding to, Vader couldn’t either. Agreed. Video game and comic creators always feel compelled to one-up each other and we wind up with power bloat. I wasn’t alive when the OT came out but I have a feeling that Vader was meant to be seen as the ultimate badass. But compared to what we see in games and comics, he’s a complete wuss. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2011, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-enterprise-vs-star-destroyer/568274/63 "2011-01-21T00:01:58Z")
> [@GargoyleWB](#): > > Each platform has critical design flaws: > > Enterprise: No seatbelts or circuit breakers Inertial Dampers and rocks. Seriously, doesn’t it seems like whenever a panel blows out in a Star Trek ship, there are rocks everywhere? WTF, where are they coming from?? ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2011, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-enterprise-vs-star-destroyer/568274/64 "2011-01-21T01:13:04Z")
> [@History\_Mystery\_and\_the\_Wolf](#): > > ability to zoom (why do we think that hyperspace \< warp speed? Star Wars ships pootle around the galaxy, far, far away just fine) would be inferior, I’m happy to give the win to the ship that’s much, much larger. > > Edit: on the shield issue, I’m happy to assume that Star Destroyer shielding is able to prevent it the same way Star Trek shields do. It doesn’t matter if hyperspace is faster than warp speed or not. If a Star Destroyer goes into hyperspace, game over, and the Enterprise controls whatever it is they are fighting about. The Enterprise can go into warp and keep on fighting with improved maneuverability. If we are talking about a stern chase I don’t know who would win - though they’d soon lose track of each other. It does not appear that you can look outside of hyperspace very well, while you can in warp. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2011, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-enterprise-vs-star-destroyer/568274/65 "2011-01-21T01:19:33Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Errm, no. [Just demonstrably no](http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tech/Propulsion/Propulsion2.html). > Man, “ambient radiation” stop transporters. Fed scanning tech (and hence transporter tech) is stopped by pockets of MgSO[sub]4[/sub], for frack’s sake - otherwise known as the common mineral “magnesite”. Saying that the SW shields, which otherwise function\* just like ST shields\*, wouldn’t function like them in this respect is the Fallacy of Special Pleading writ large. > > And Star Destroyers carry a complement of 9 700 storm troopers, so boarding actions would not be trivial. The alternative, the beaming over of photon torpedoes that trekkies love to speculate about - when has that ever been done? ST shields are clearly designed to stop transporters. I don’t think it is a given that shields designed for a totally different purpose would stop them - though we may as well assume they do, since otherwise, game over. As far as speed goes, I’m talking tactical speed. If a Star Destroyer is defending a position, going into hyperspace and running is not going to help much, even if it is much faster than warp. The Enterprise has far better tactical maneuverability. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2011, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-enterprise-vs-star-destroyer/568274/66 "2011-01-21T01:21:46Z")
> [@noobzilla](#): > > Great posts by some of you guys. I find this community incredibly intelligent and knowledgable. > I have actually saved some of the best lines from this thread. > The part about a Star-Destroyer not actually destroying stars, like a Star-Fighter doesn’t actually fight stars. I lol’d. > > But I have a question did anyone actually read the article I posted? I did, but it is seriously over complicated. If Kirk, Spock and McCoy can beam to the bridge of a Star Destroyer, why not beam a nuke to the bridge? The Darth Vader would not be in two, but in many pieces. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2011, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-enterprise-vs-star-destroyer/568274/67 "2011-01-21T01:25:55Z")
> [@Raguleader](#): > > Also, let’s consider each ship’s very dangerous superweapon: > > The Enterprise: The Kirk Smirk and the ripped shirt (twofer!) > > Star Destroyer: Vader’s Force Choke (Even works while teleconferencing!) > > Galactica: The Adama Death Glare A Star Destroyer has one important defensive feature, I must admit. There don’t seem to be any women on it, so Kirk can’t seduce any. If, however, there is a waitress somewhere below decks, they can kiss their ass goodbye. ---
**Author:** ![Raguleader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/258eb7/32.png) [@Raguleader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raguleader)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2011, 2:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-enterprise-vs-star-destroyer/568274/68 "2011-01-21T02:03:01Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > A Star Destroyer has one important defensive feature, I must admit. There don’t seem to be any women on it, so Kirk can’t seduce any. If, however, there is a waitress somewhere below decks, they can kiss their ass goodbye. This here is an excellent point. Then again, they could always just clonk a couple guys over the head and steal their uniforms if there aren’t any women about. That is a valid strategy in both Star Trek AND Star Wars. ---
**Author:** ![AncientHumanoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ancienthumanoid/32/278_2.png) [@AncientHumanoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AncientHumanoid)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2011, 2:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-enterprise-vs-star-destroyer/568274/69 "2011-01-21T02:23:46Z")
Lensman vs Soft Weapon ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2011, 3:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-enterprise-vs-star-destroyer/568274/70 "2011-01-21T03:14:18Z")
> [@Raguleader](#): > > Actually, a Star Destroyer is just a Destroyer, with “Star” tacked onto it as a standard prefix. Per the Star Wars RPG, a Star Destroyer isn’t a destroyer - it’s a cruiser. ---
**Author:** ![Troy\_McClure\_SF](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/troy_mcclure_sf/32/4150_2.png) [@Troy\_McClure\_SF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Troy_McClure_SF)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2011, 3:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-enterprise-vs-star-destroyer/568274/71 "2011-01-21T03:14:47Z")
> [@KneadToKnow](#): > > Is it 2000 again already? > > [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=23098](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=23098) > > [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=42663](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=42663) Dude, we’re on an internet message board. How often can we really go without discussing this? ---
**Author:** ![Raguleader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/258eb7/32.png) [@Raguleader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raguleader)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2011, 4:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-enterprise-vs-star-destroyer/568274/72 "2011-01-21T04:49:49Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Per the Star Wars RPG, a Star Destroyer isn’t a destroyer - it’s a cruiser. Which brings us back to my previous point: In certain settings, “Destroyer” seems to be used for a class of super-powerful warship that outmatches even cruisers. The only examples that come to mind off the top of my head are Star Wars (with the Imperial Class Star Destroyer Cruisers :D) and Babylon 5, with the Omega, Warlock, and Victory class destroyers that the humans use (though nobody except the humans seem inclined to call their biggest ships Destroyers. They’re just Adjective Cruisers, be they Heavy, Star, or Battle Cruisers.) It used to bug me, but then I remembered that for a time, the US Navy had Frigates that had as much firepower as other nations’ Cruisers (until they redesignated them all to actually _be_ cruisers.), and that frigates in the 1700s were basically what we’d call cruisers or destroyers today, and figured I just wouldn’t stress about what some fictional person called what type of ship as long as they were at least internally consistent. ---
**Author:** ![pancakes3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ba9def/32.png) [@pancakes3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pancakes3)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2011, 5:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-enterprise-vs-star-destroyer/568274/73 "2011-01-21T05:12:16Z")
size matters not. xwing vs death star? that said, in the real world? a star destroyer would crush the enterprise. ---
**Author:** ![Raguleader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/258eb7/32.png) [@Raguleader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raguleader)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2011, 5:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-enterprise-vs-star-destroyer/568274/74 "2011-01-21T05:42:28Z")
> [@pancakes3](#): > > size matters not. xwing vs death star? > > that said, in the real world? a star destroyer would crush the enterprise. To be fair, in the real world, neither ship would exist… 😃 ---
**Author:** ![FordTaurusSHO94](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/f07891/32.png) [@FordTaurusSHO94](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FordTaurusSHO94)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2011, 6:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-enterprise-vs-star-destroyer/568274/75 "2011-01-21T06:54:19Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > I see no reason not to apply this characterization to the rest of the TNG/DS9 Starfleet. Look at DS9 - in the middle of a war, but Sisko still has his kid there - attending school taught by…the Chief’s wife! So OK, “orbiting daycare” is a better term for that one. But the trend is there. Voyager avoids this by giving us the pseudo-kid Kes and her (frankly, perverse) daddy/lover relationship with Neelix. Waifs and strays, man, waifs and strays. By the time the war started, the school was no longer in operation. Jake was actually working for Starfleet as a reporter and Nog was an officer. ---
**Author:** ![Sparky812](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/eb9ed0/32.png) [@Sparky812](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sparky812)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2011, 12:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-enterprise-vs-star-destroyer/568274/76 "2011-01-21T12:29:04Z")
> [@pancakes3](#): > > size matters not. xwing vs death star? > > that said, in the real world? a star destroyer would crush the enterprise. > [@Raguleader](#): > > To be fair, in the real world, neither ship would exist… 😃 I think he means that if a Star Destroyer were to land on top of Enterprise it would rip both supports for the propulsion units from the secondary hull and cause severe damage to the bridge and primary hull… leaving bits of broken plastic everywhere.😃 ---
**Author:** ![Raguleader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/258eb7/32.png) [@Raguleader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raguleader)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2011, 12:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-enterprise-vs-star-destroyer/568274/77 "2011-01-21T12:55:11Z")
> [@Sparky812](#): > > I think he means that if a Star Destroyer were to land on top of Enterprise it would rip both supports for the propulsion units from the secondary hull and cause severe damage to the bridge and primary hull… leaving bits of broken plastic everywhere.😃 Of course, to do so, they’d risk compromising the warp core’s containment fields, causing a Warp Core Breach (which is Technobabble for “HOLYCRAPRUNLIKEYOUVENEVERRUNBEFORE!”)😃 ---
**Author:** ![GargoyleWB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gargoylewb/32/199_2.png) [@GargoyleWB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GargoyleWB)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2011, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-enterprise-vs-star-destroyer/568274/78 "2011-01-21T15:27:16Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Per the Star Wars RPG, a Star Destroyer isn’t a destroyer - it’s a cruiser. [David Attenborough] In fact, it is neither a star, nor a destroyer. It bears its young live, and being a mammal, produces milk. It is in fact most closely related to the this little fellow here…the racoon. [/David Attenborough] ---
**Author:** ![Tom\_Scud](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/f08c70/32.png) [@Tom\_Scud](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tom_Scud)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2011, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-enterprise-vs-star-destroyer/568274/79 "2011-01-21T15:34:22Z")
> [@pancakes3](#): > > size matters not. xwing vs death star? > > that said, in the real world? a star destroyer would crush the enterprise. > [@Raguleader](#): > > To be fair, in the real world, neither ship would exist… 😃 I dunno. Anyone know which model was bigger? ---
**Author:** ![KneadToKnow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kneadtoknow/32/3999_2.png) [@KneadToKnow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KneadToKnow)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2011, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-enterprise-vs-star-destroyer/568274/80 "2011-01-21T15:48:54Z")
> [@Tom\_Scud](#): > > I dunno. Anyone know which model was bigger? The AMT/Ertl Imperial Star Destroyer model was IIRC about 15" long, about 3" shorter than the standard AMT/Ertl _Constitution_-class USS _Enterprise_. However, you’re not taking into account the difference in scales. The Enterprise model was about 1/650 and the Star Destroyer was billed as 1/4500 or something like that. 🙂 Knead What do you mean “we’re out of glue again”? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-enterprise-vs-star-destroyer/568274.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-enterprise-vs-star-destroyer/568274.md?page=5)