Sign in to follow this  
Validus

Enterprise E versus Super Star Destroyer

Recommended Posts

This is a total geek question I know but we are all, after all, total geeks.

 

This topic came up recently with a friend of mine who just recently watched Return of the Jedi and First Contact with his son for the first time. The Enterprise E (Sovereign Class) is the most powerful ship in starfleet and the Super Star Destroyer is the most powerful ship in the Imperial fleet from Star Wars.

 

Frankly I think the Enterprise E would pulverize the white elephant from the Lucasverse. The weapons on the SSD are certainly numerous, but individually they pack very little punch. They weren't even enough to prevent a rebel A-wing fighter from crashing into the bridge. By contrast the Enterprise E was able to hit and run with little trouble on a slower moving Borg Cube...and a Borg Cube is doubtless far more maneuverable then the manhatten-sized SSD. I think after about a dozen quantum torpedoes the mighty SSD would start to look like a whale riddled with harpoons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know, the SSD's massive size alone would make it difficult to destroy. I mean, the thing is 17 kilometers long! Versus the Ent-E's 650 (give or take) meters? Not to mention that the weapon bank on the SSD number in the thousands, if not tens of thousands. That would be a big problem for the Ent-E, despite it's maneuverability.

 

The Ent-E's major advantage is the range of it's weapons. In the TNG episode "The Wounded," the U.S.S. Phoenix was able to destroy a Cardassian ship from a range of 500,000 km, and that's with weaponry that is inferior to what the Ent-E has. So the Ent-E has a range of at least 500,000 km, and probably greater. Whereas we have never seen anything in the Wars universe shoot at anything but point-blank range. Aside from the Death Star, of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, and we have only seen the Executor in battle once. The main focus of this battle was Death Star II so we never got the opportunity to see all the weaponry the ship had. Most likely it was more effective at battles over a distance than at point blank range.

 

The A-wing attack not withstanding, Imperial capital ships are built to take a lot of punishment. True that A-wing took it out, but only after the battle was mostly over. We have little idea what happened before that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By that time it had undoubtedly taken a good amount of punishment already. If I remember correctly, Admiral Akbar had ordered all ships to concetrate fire on the SSD. And I find it highly unlikely that there were no armed Rebel capitol ships.

Edited by WishfireOmega

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I find it highly unlikely that there were no armed Rebel capitol ships.

 

In fact we know there were. We saw then trading fire with the Imperial capital ships, just not the Executor.

 

You can't fully analyze the largest space battle fought in that war based on only 8 minutes and 12 seconds of screen time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Time for the Weapons Expert (and avid SW reader) to step forward...

 

First, Nowhere is there any indication of ranges for the weapons on the Super Star Destroyer's weapons. Nor is there any set hitting power equivelent for them. What I DO know from reading the Star Wars books is that warships are more than capable of engagingin planetary bombardments from orbit.

 

The Phoenix destroyed a Frieghter at a great range, but...Starfleet ships, as we've seen, do most of their fighting in close. Visual indications during the battle of the Baisan Rift in Nemesis would suggest effective fighting ranges of between 1 kilometer (considered Point Blank range for large warships) out to about 100 Kilometers. Also, directed energy weapons rely on focusing the energy beam very tightly. As range increases, power decreases. While a shot at extreme range may destroy a frieghter, chances are power bleed off is so bad at that range that effective fire against a warship is probably useless.

 

A Super Star Destroyer is generally accepted to be 11,000 meters long, and armed with 250 turbolaser cannons, 250 heavy turbolaser cannons, 250 Ion cannons, and 250 cuncussion missile tubes. The Enterprise E is 685 meters long, and is armed with not less than 14 phaser arrays and 6 torpedo tubes. the Enterprise E is relatively meneuverable, given it's size, but she's not exactly a fighter jet, either.

 

Someone mentioned the A-Wings...the attack by the A-Wings that took down the bridge deflector shields was late in the battle, after Ackbar ordered the fleet to assault it. We have to assume, then, that the Executor was under attack by numerous well-armed cruisers. That kind of fire from multiple angles would strain the shields in such a way that the A-wings might be able to knock out the bridge Deflectors.

 

So, now, let's assume that the two ships did meet in battle, and actually fought. Most sensible Captains would run from a ship more than 11 times your size and armed as well as this thing is, but lets say you've got Captain Crazy running the ship. or me.

 

the Soveriegn class starship opens by firing opening shots at maximum range. at this range, both ships are relatively small targets, but the Enterprise lands a few hits. at that range, the effectiveness and slow rate of fire for the main phasers means little effectiveness. gotta close with the ship to do real damage. So the Captain closes....

 

Fast Forward...

 

The Enterprise enters ideal firing range, and opens fire with phasers and torpedoes. Problem is, at this range, she's also vulnerable to the fire from the Destroyer. the Destroyer's Captain, unsure of the effect of Ion Cannons against this odd vessel, powers down most of them (keeping a few open for test-shots) and redirects power to shields. While the Enterprise was closing, though, he deployed his fighters, and has them waiting. he brings online his turbolasers and heavy turbolasers, and the cuncussion missile tubes. the Enterprise again fires first. It's Phasers and torpedoes rake the Destroyer's now reinforced shields. the Destroyer's Captain rolls his ship to present an Edge-On profile to the Enterprise (the narrowest profile for the ship) which also brings to bear roughly half of his weapons at this range. the return fire from between 100 and 200 guns, plus missiles, is enormous. the Enterprise is constantly rocked by shield hits. Turbolaser and concussion missile fire bleed off the ship's shields, but Enterprise presses the attack. She slashes over the massive ship's hull, firing downward. the return fire damages the ventral shields, and as Enterprise comes about, the fighters jump. 144 TIE Fighters, Bombers, and Interceptors swarm the ship. while the fighter's weapons aren't individually a serious threat, used in a massive attack, they quickly begin to cause shield damage. TIE Bombers swoop in firing their cuncussion missiles, while TIE Fighters and Interceptors make strafing runs at break-neck speeds. Enterprise is now overwhelmed. While her weapons may have given her a decent chance, against more than 100 individual firing platforms, the ship is overwhelmed. Combat Coordination between the fighters and the Destroyer keeps the Enterprise under constant fire, while she returns fire ineffectively with weapons designed to fight against other large ships.

 

in the end, the Destroyer and it's fighters prove too much. With 750 weapons and over 140 fighters, the Enterprise's shields fail. the Fighters target the weapons systems and other key distinguishable targets, making hit and fade attacks, while the Destroyer rakes the ship with punishing solvos from her main battery guns. Cuncussion Missiles rip open the engineering hull, and turbolaser fire causes the warp core to breach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Knowing Picard, he would probably bring the E to ramming speed... whatever that is and ram the SSD. I have no doubt both ships would be destroyed then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I likely to Cast Enterprise E-The Extremo-& xtra Exellent Flagship!

 

.................................................................................................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The E. The SSD didn't even have the shields to deflect a fighter plane from flying straight into it and eventually taking the whole flippin' thing down!

 

That was my thought. I mean, the Enterprise E was literally able to fly circles around a Borg cube and blast great chunks out of it with little effort...and I know that a Borg cube is a hell of a lot toughter then the SSD even given its size.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First: There is no such thing as a 'super star destroyer'. Only one person called it that, and he wasn't a member of the imperial fleet.

 

Short answer: The E-E is raped.

 

Long answer: The E-E is raped by the point defense systems on the Executer.

 

The E. The SSD didn't even have the shields to deflect a fighter plane from flying straight into it and eventually taking the whole flippin' thing down!

 

 

The Shields on the Executer were already taken down in the fight when the Mon Calamari capital ships concentrated all of thier firepower on it. Also the RotJ Novelization states that the ship was almost back to being fully operational when Palpy died (which didn't help the fleet ~ read the novelization for more info).

 

Knowing Picard, he would probably bring the E to ramming speed... whatever that is and ram the SSD. I have no doubt both ships would be destroyed then.

 

The captain of the executer could sleep through the collision.

 

 

Someone mentioned the A-Wings...the attack by the A-Wings that took down the bridge deflector shields was late in the battle, after Ackbar ordered the fleet to assault it.

 

Sensor domes not Shield generators.

 

 

The Phoenix destroyed a Frieghter at a great range, but...Starfleet ships, as we've seen, do most of their fighting in close. Visual indications during the battle of the Baisan Rift in Nemesis would suggest effective fighting ranges of between 1 kilometer (considered Point Blank range for large warships) out to about 100 Kilometers.

 

While very true, Star wars ships have ranges up to 12 light minutes to put this in perspective, a Venator (much less an Executer) could sit almost on the orbit of MARS and still hit Earth, while you have to be atleast in geosycronous orbit to hit anything in trek (Demons/Terra Prime not withstanding).

 

The reason that we see some fights in SW being as short ranged as they are is that the 2 major fleet actions we have seen (in RotJ and RotS) were situations were one side had a need to get in close (in RotS it was to prevent The Invisible Hand from jumping away, and in RotJ the Empire wanted to kill Home One).

 

 

 

First, Nowhere is there any indication of ranges for the weapons on the Super Star Destroyer's weapons. Nor is there any set hitting power equivelent for them. What I DO know from reading the Star Wars books is that warships are more than capable of engagingin planetary bombardments from orbit.

 

We can extrapolte them from the firepower stated in the ICS for a troop transport that was more than 20 years older. The Acclimator Class transports had 12 Medium Turbolasers (which don't act like lasers [Note: I'm happily suprised that noone tried to pull the 'navigational defelectors block lasers' line which is total BS re: The borg cutting beam]) each of which output more firepower (200 gigatons) per shot than most Federation ships can produce in a week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Shields on the Executer were already taken down in the fight when the Mon Calamari capital ships concentrated all of thier firepower on it. Also the RotJ Novelization states that the ship was almost back to being fully operational when Palpy died (which didn't help the fleet ~ read the novelization for more info).

 

That doesn't make sense. The Executor had already impacted upon the DS mkII by that point. It exploded. It was nothing but debris. How does debris become almost fully functional in so short a time?

 

The captain of the executer could sleep through the collision.

 

Doubtful.

 

Sensor domes not Shield generators.

 

I know this is an on-going debate, but how do you figure? For one, the shield dropped as soon as the dome was destroyed. Secondly, I've seen specs (both considered grade 'b' canon) that identify the domes as both shield generators and sensor domes.

 

Star wars ships have ranges up to 12 light minutes to put this in perspective, a Venator (much less an Executer) could sit almost on the orbit of MARS and still hit Earth, while you have to be atleast in geosycronous orbit to hit anything in trek (Demons/Terra Prime not withstanding).

 

I've seen this argument plenty of times. It is irrelevant. Even at the speed of light, it would take a weapon 12 minutes to travel that distance. And we have never seen any weapon in Star Wars (or Star Trek, for that matter) travel at the speed of light. (Not including weapons fired while at +light speeds.) In any case, from a sublight origin, those weapons would take longer than 12 minutes to reach their target. Firing at a planet which has a fixed orbit and a fixed speed, that's one thing. But firing at a tiny object which could wait for 11 minutes and 45 seconds, and then casually move out of the path of trajectory, that's something different.

 

The reason that we see some fights in SW being as short ranged as they are is that the 2 major fleet actions we have seen (in RotJ and RotS) were situations were one side had a need to get in close (in RotS it was to prevent The Invisible Hand from jumping away, and in RotJ the Empire wanted to kill Home One).

 

No, the reason we see the fighters getting in so close is because they simply don't have the energy output of larger craft. Therefore, they have to be much closer to their targets. Of course, their targets are supposed to be enemy fighters.

 

We can extrapolte them from the firepower stated in the ICS for a troop transport that was more than 20 years older. The Acclimator Class transports had 12 Medium Turbolasers (which don't act like lasers [Note: I'm happily suprised that noone tried to pull the 'navigational defelectors block lasers' line which is total BS re: The borg cutting beam]) each of which output more firepower (200 gigatons) per shot than most Federation ships can produce in a week.

 

1. You don't see that argument here because we never actually see lasers used against Fed ships, nor do we see lasers used by Imperial ships. Neither Trek nor Wars uses actual lasers. If they did, we wouldn't see them. The closest we've ever seen was the Borg cutting beam that you mentioned. However, it had what appeared to be a disruption field around it. Notice that in "Q Who?" there was a wide beam with a much thinner cutting beam inside it.

 

2. How does the 200 GT firepower as indicated by the ICS even remotely match up with anything we see on-screen? The various ICSs are grade "B" canon, so unless they actually match up with anything seen on-screen (or depicted in the novelisations of the movies, or their scripts), they are irrelevant.

Edited by WishfireOmega

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2. How does the 200 GT firepower as indicated by the ICS even remotely match up with anything we see on-screen? The various ICSs are grade "B" canon, so unless they actually match up with anything seen on-screen (or depicted in the novelisations of the movies, or their scripts), they are irrelevant.[/color]

 

On the other hand, we also hear "sitting ducks" mentioned in The Phantom Menace even though ducks are native to Earth. We also see "easter eggs" of X-Wings and TIE fighters in Attack of the Clones. Another easter egg in Revenge of the Sith shows the launching of a kitchen sink toward a Federation battlecruiser as a weapon, indicating that kitchen sinks are used as weapons. There is also an easter egg of a United States space shuttle heading toward the spaceport on Coruscant.

 

So we have new elements that must be considered canon because they exist on screen:

 

* Ducks which are native to Earth

* X-Wings and Tie Fighters that exist prior to when we think they were invented

* Kitchen sinks used as weapons

* NASA vehicles that have been sent back in time to a galaxy far, far away.

 

My point: Even appearing in the movies doesn't make it canon,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2. How does the 200 GT firepower as indicated by the ICS even remotely match up with anything we see on-screen? The various ICSs are grade "B" canon, so unless they actually match up with anything seen on-screen (or depicted in the novelisations of the movies, or their scripts), they are irrelevant.[/color]

 

On the other hand, we also hear "sitting ducks" mentioned in The Phantom Menace even though ducks are native to Earth. We also see "easter eggs" of X-Wings and TIE fighters in Attack of the Clones. Another easter egg in Revenge of the Sith shows the launching of a kitchen sink toward a Federation battlecruiser as a weapon, indicating that kitchen sinks are used as weapons. There is also an easter egg of a United States space shuttle heading toward the spaceport on Coruscant.

 

So we have new elements that must be considered canon because they exist on screen:

 

* Ducks which are native to Earth

* X-Wings and Tie Fighters that exist prior to when we think they were invented

* Kitchen sinks used as weapons

* NASA vehicles that have been sent back in time to a galaxy far, far away.

 

My point: Even appearing in the movies doesn't make it canon,

 

First of all, do you have any screen-shots to back those claims up? Secondly, as far as X-Wings and TIEs are concerned, their uses doesn't mean a canon violation. It is possible that the desings were used during the Clone Wars. Thirdly, there are levels of canon. Some have precedence over others. As I've stated above, the movies (and maybe the Clone Wars animated series, though I'm unsure about that), the scripts for them, and the novelisations for them are the top of the food chain. Everything else is lower.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm only hitting on a few points to make my case here, but to be honest most of the star trek vs star wars debates have been decided in favor of star wars. Now While I don't care for the debating style of Mike Wong and the rest of the ASVSers, the fact remains that they are right when doing most of the technical analysis.

 

 

That doesn't make sense. The Executor had already impacted upon the DS mkII by that point. It exploded. It was nothing but debris. How does debris become almost fully functional in so short a time?

 

Sorry, I got the colission and the death of Palpy mixed up. Had the death star not been there, the ship would have been back in operation shortly.

 

I know this is an on-going debate, but how do you figure? For one, the shield dropped as soon as the dome was destroyed. Secondly, I've seen specs (both considered grade 'b' canon) that identify the domes as both shield generators and sensor domes.

 

It is not an ongoing debate, as it was established that they were sheild generators a while back. Sheilds dropped BEFORE the A-wings hit. How else did the fighters even get that close?

 

No, the reason we see the fighters getting in so close is because they simply don't have the energy output of larger craft. Therefore, they have to be much closer to their targets. Of course, their targets are supposed to be enemy fighters.

 

Irrelevent with respect to star trek.

 

2. How does the 200 GT firepower as indicated by the ICS even remotely match up with anything we see on-screen? The various ICSs are grade "B" canon, so unless they actually match up with anything seen on-screen (or depicted in the novelisations of the movies, or their scripts), they are irrelevant.

 

WRONG. The ICSs are canon unless contradicted.

 

As for your question: The asteroid scenes in both TESB and in AotC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry, I got the colission and the death of Palpy mixed up. Had the death star not been there, the ship would have been back in operation shortly.

 

Evidence?

 

It is not an ongoing debate, as it was established that they were sheild generators a while back. Sheilds dropped BEFORE the A-wings hit. How else did the fighters even get that close?

 

If it's not an on-going debate, people wouldn't still be debating it, would they?

 

Irrelevent with respect to star trek.

 

I misread "fight" as "fighter." My mistake.

 

WRONG. The ICSs are canon unless contradicted.

 

I never said they weren't canon. I just said that they're grade "B" canon. As in, lower down the ladder than the movies, the scripts for the movies, and the novelizations of the movies. And maybe the Clone Wars animated series, though I'm uncertain on that one.

 

As for your question: The asteroid scenes in both TESB and in AotC.

 

In TESB, most of the asteroids we see are between 50 and 100 meters at their widest points. The destruction of any of them does not indicate 200 GT power output. There's also the fact that they have the same reactions to turbolasers, impacting with TIEs, and impacting with each other, which indicated that they have something in them that's volatile.

 

The asteroid scene in AotC doesn't show anywhere near 200 GT either, as all those asteroids the were damaged were only fragmented, without any parts being vaporized. If I remember correctly, the seismic (sp?) charges Slave 1 dropped to acheive the effect we see were designed to fragment asteroids in order to allow easy extraction of their usable minerals. That in itself, coupled with the fact that the asteroids we see there were maybe 5 km wide, indicates a yeild much lower than 200 GT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, I got the colission and the death of Palpy mixed up. Had the death star not been there, the ship would have been back in operation shortly.

 

Evidence?

 

The novelization.

 

If it's not an on-going debate, people wouldn't still be debating it, would they?

 

People are stupid and refuse to see what is infront of them.

 

 

 

I never said they weren't canon. I just said that they're grade "B" canon. As in, lower down the ladder than the movies, the scripts for the movies, and the novelizations of the movies. And maybe the Clone Wars animated series, though I'm uncertain on that one.

 

They don't have to be supported, they just have to not be contradicted.

 

In TESB, most of the asteroids we see are between 50 and 100 meters at their widest points. The destruction of any of them does not indicate 200 GT power output. There's also the fact that they have the same reactions to turbolasers, impacting with TIEs, and impacting with each other, which indicated that they have something in them that's volatile.

 

Vaporizing a 40 meter sphere of rock is no easy task, and I point you to Mike Wong's page on the subject, as he has alteady defined the figures.

 

The asteroid scene in AotC doesn't show anywhere near 200 GT either, as all those asteroids the were damaged were only fragmented, without any parts being vaporized. If I remember correctly, the seismic (sp?) charges Slave 1 dropped to acheive the effect we see were designed to fragment asteroids in order to allow easy extraction of their usable minerals. That in itself, coupled with the fact that the asteroids we see there were maybe 5 km wide, indicates a yeild much lower than 200 GT.

 

The fragmentation (which is energy intensive) happens with rather small charges, which if you use a linear volume scale up to larger weapons, gets you yields that fit within the figures given by the ICS.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The novelization.

 

That's like a Christian fundie merely saying that the evidence for their god is in the Bible. I was thinking of something a bit more substantial. Like, for example, page number, paragraph, and a passage or two that backs your claim up.

 

People are stupid and refuse to see what is infront of them.

 

People tend to look at the visual evidence. i.e. the movies. There's no indication whatsoever that those are sensor domes.

 

They don't have to be supported, they just have to not be contradicted.

 

Supporting evidence is irrelevant? :P

 

Vaporizing a 40 meter sphere of rock is no easy task, and I point you to Mike Wong's page on the subject, as he has alteady defined the figures.

 

That doesn't change anything. There was a Voyager episode (I don't recall the name, but it's the one where Neelix and Tuvok had to rise into the ionosphere from the surface in a tethered orbital cargo pod) in which the crew was clearly surpirsed when a standard photon torpedo failed to vaporize a 1 km-wide asteroid. Chakotay even stated that the asteroid should have been vaporized. And yet, most figures put the max yeild of a standard Fed photon torpedo to be in the low megatons. Now, how does low megatons destroy 1 km asteroid while it takes 200 GT to destroy asteroids that are, on the average, 1/20 the size? Either Wars has far lower weapon yields, or Trek has far high yields. Or they meet somewhere in the middle.

 

he fragmentation (which is energy intensive) happens with rather small charges, which if you use a linear volume scale up to larger weapons, gets you yields that fit within the figures given by the ICS.

 

So, that scene is not indicative of 200 GT, as you claimed. Scaling up is not indicative unless you can prove beyond a doubt that what you're scaling up to, as well as everything in between, matching the increase.

Edited by WishfireOmega

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Enterprise "E" wins.

Hands down.

No contest. :)

 

Show me why the E-E could beat a ship that is hundreds of times more masive, and from a culture that has had FTL, sheilds, Energy weapons et all for thousands of years.

 

That's like a Christian fundie merely saying that the evidence for their god is in the Bible. I was thinking of something a bit more substantial. Like, for example, page number, paragraph, and a passage or two that backs your claim up.

 

I myself have never read the Novelizations, but I shall try to find you the relevent quotes.

 

People tend to look at the visual evidence. i.e. the movies. There's no indication whatsoever that those are sensor domes.

 

There is no indication visually that they are sheild domes either.

 

Supporting evidence is irrelevant? :mad1:

 

That's not what I said, so stop the lies.

 

That doesn't change anything. There was a Voyager episode (I don't recall the name, but it's the one where Neelix and Tuvok had to rise into the ionosphere from the surface in a tethered orbital cargo pod) in which the crew was clearly surpirsed when a standard photon torpedo failed to vaporize a 1 km-wide asteroid. Chakotay even stated that the asteroid should have been vaporized. And yet, most figures put the max yeild of a standard Fed photon torpedo to be in the low megatons. Now, how does low megatons destroy 1 km asteroid while it takes 200 GT to destroy asteroids that are, on the average, 1/20 the size? Either Wars has far lower weapon yields, or Trek has far high yields. Or they meet somewhere in the middle.

 

No, what they said that should have happened was that there shouldn't be any large chunks left of the asteroid. Also IIRC visual evidence does not point to a 1 kilometer long asteroid, but one about 300 meters long.

 

So, that scene is not indicative of 200 GT, as you claimed. Scaling up is not indicative unless you can prove beyond a doubt that what you're scaling up to, as well as everything in between, matching the increase.

 

What you want is intrapolation not extrapolation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No offense but it really cracks me up that SO much thought has gone into this topic......... :mad1:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I myself have never read the Novelizations, but I shall try to find you the relevent quotes.

 

So, in other words, you don't actually have any evidence to back up your claims with.

 

You find the relevant passage, I'll look at it, but until then...

 

There is no indication visually that they are sheild domes either.

 

We see the dome get destroyed. The next shot shows the inside of the bridge, still shaking from the explosion. Immediately, an officer standing over a console turns and reports, "Sir, we've lost our bridge deflector shields."

 

That seems rather indicative that it was a shield generator.

 

That's not what I said, so stop the lies.

 

Now I'm lying, huh? :mad1: You just said "They don't have to be supported." If they don't have to be supported, then, like I said, supporting evidence is irrelevant.

 

No, what they said that should have happened was that there shouldn't be any large chunks left of the asteroid. Also IIRC visual evidence does not point to a 1 kilometer long asteroid, but one about 300 meters long.

 

The scene goes like this...

 

Voyager fires a torpedo. The torpedo explodes. The asteroid is blown into several chunks.

Tuvok: The asteroid is fragmenting, but most of the debris is still on a collision course with the planet.

Janeway: Target the fragments. Destroy them.

Chakotay: That asteroid should have been vaporized. What happened?

 

As I described earlier. Although I do admit that what Kim says right after seems to contradict what Chakotay said. Kim's answer to Chakotay was, "Not sure. Sensors showed a simple nickel-iron composition. We shouldn't be seeing fragments more than a centimeter in diameter."

 

However, one could safely say that if the largest frament they expect was only a centimeter in diameter, then most of the asteroid was, indeed vaporized.

 

And even if it's 300 meters rather than 1 km, that's still a hell of a lot bigger than the 50 meter asteroids in TESB.

 

What you want is intrapolation not extrapolation.

 

Irrelevant. I don't care if it's interpolation or extrapolation. I'm only concerned with determining whether or not the 200GT is accurate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We see the dome get destroyed. The next shot shows the inside of the bridge, still shaking from the explosion. Immediately, an officer standing over a console turns and reports, "Sir, we've lost our bridge deflector shields."

 

That seems rather indicative that it was a shield generator.

 

I'll quote Curtis Saxton on this: (Link)

 

The failure of Executor's bridge deflector shields coinciding with a globe's destruction may merely indicate that the damage to one system affected power to the other in an unanticipated way. Note that only one of the globes was damaged. If the globes on the command tower were the actual shield generators then both would have to be damaged or destroyed before the bridge shields were wholly lost. (It should also be noted that the globes on the bridge tower were only two out of at least eight that can be seen in that neighbourhood of the dorsal hull.) At best, Executor's demise says more about a flukey and synergistic system failures than any functional connection between globes and shields.

 

In fact there might not be any causal connection between the destruction of a globe and the failure of the bridge deflector shields. Early in the battle, [ROTJ novel p.170] Admiral Ackbar gave specific targeting orders for the Alliance capital ships:

 

"Concentrate your fire on their power generators. If we can knock out their shields, our fighters might stand a chance against them."

 

In other words, the shield failure was probably due to a power loss which was the deliberate result of the rebel heavy ships' bombardment. In fact it might only have been only a temporary shield failure, with the generators taking some time to recharge. The damage to the globe may have indirectly contributed to the ship's vulnerability, insofar as it might hamper raising the shields again once they were already down. The destruction of one scanner globe was a sign that the bridge deflector shields (which would otherwise protect the globes from starfighters) had already failed. This is a demonstration of Executor's vulnerability, not the cause of it.

 

Furthermore, there is evidence of at least one warship at the Battle of Endor which lost its bridge shields even though its globes were completely intact. This was one of the vessels with multiple bridge nodules on the face of the command tower. (It may be the intermediate-sized "communications ship" described in the novel.) In the closeup footage of the battle around this ship there are great gushes of flame coming from inside most of the bridges, exploding out into the void. Even though the shields are completely lost and the bridge regions have obviously been devastated by rebel bombardment, the globes atop the tower are serenely unharmed and presumably fully functional.

 

Now I'm lying, huh? :mad1: You just said "They don't have to be supported." If they don't have to be supported, then, like I said, supporting evidence is irrelevant.

 

I missunderstood your remark. My point is that the ICSs do not have to be supported, only not contradicted.

 

And even if it's 300 meters rather than 1 km, that's still a hell of a lot bigger than the 50 meter asteroids in TESB.

 

Yes, because the main weapon on Voyager *might* equal the point defense system on a regular Star Destroyer, of which a ISD has no less than 128.

 

The fact also remains that In the episode Pegasus, it would take atleast 200 photons to destroy and asteroid that had less than an order of magnitude more mass than the one in Voyager.

 

Irrelevant. I don't care if it's interpolation or extrapolation. I'm only concerned with determining whether or not the 200GT is accurate.[/color]

 

You said "Scaling up is not indicative unless you can prove beyond a doubt that what you're scaling up to, as well as everything in between, matching the increase."

 

The only visual that we have that is both greater than 200 GT and is against (an) object we can classify is Death Star main weapon. So unless you want me to use it, a weapon that is larger than every other ship in the universe), then you are asking the impossible.

 

In short you are asking me to show you a 200 GT explosion to show that another explosion is the same yeild- when I have admited that there are no visuals to that effect - but not contradictions either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, if you had put the Battlestar Galatica up against Enterprise-E, then you'd have one terrific battle.

I think that Galatica would win because they have Vipers and Raptors going for them. Enterprise-E doesn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, if you had put the Battlestar Galatica up against Enterprise-E, then you'd have one terrific battle.

I think that Galatica would win because they have Vipers and Raptors going for them. Enterprise-E doesn't.

 

Actually The E-E B****SLAPS Galactica. The only things that Galactica has going for it are it's armor (phasers are quite bad at heavy metal disintegration) and extensive ECM. Firepower wise we're looking at a situation where Galactica could do damage to the E-E, but the Bucket herself was being gang-banged by 3 basestars using conventional missiles (and would have been lost had Lee not shown up).

 

Cylons on the other hand own just about all federation ships (in the TNG+ era) as Federation computer security is horrid (this is different than ENT and TOS security, and we don't know enough about TMP-Lost era computers to make a fair assesment). After all Federation ships compile and execute foriegn code - even when it destroys the ship (re: Iconian Virus).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep it polite, guys. No personal attacks or I'm going to have to put on my mod hat and start being a bad guy.

 

Back to being a Trek fan, the Enterprise (D & E) has been in battles with much larger ships and found a way to win (the Scimitar, Borg ships). I have no doubt the Enterprise could defeat a superstar destroyer. In Star Wars, since small ships can destroy those "mighty" Death Stars then I have little confidence in the construction of any ships built for the Empire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[Actually The E-E B****SLAPS Galactica. The only things that Galactica has going for it are it's armor (phasers are quite bad at heavy metal disintegration) and extensive ECM. Firepower wise we're looking at a situation where Galactica could do damage to the E-E, but the Bucket herself was being gang-banged by 3 basestars using conventional missiles (and would have been lost had Lee not shown up).

 

Let's be fair here. It was a LOT of conventional missiles, and there were 4 base ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's be fair here. It was a LOT of conventional missiles, and there were 4 base ships.

 

I thought that Galactica took out one of the baseships early on, but I could have been wrong. Also unless the missiles used had anti-armor warheads, it takes a LOT of missiles to equal a small nuke (Think of a rectangualr prisim 75 Feet by 75 Feet by over 300 feet of High explosive - and that's just warhead volume).

 

Back to being a Trek fan, the Enterprise (D & E) has been in battles with much larger ships and found a way to win (the Scimitar, Borg ships).

 

Shinzon was an idiot, and was 'toying' with Picard, and even then, if not for data blowing up the core thing, the E-E would have been lost. As for the Borg - well they are chronically stupid, and the volume of a cube is but a fraction of the volume of an Executer (the term SSD is only used by the rebelion, and thus isn't considered a proper term of classification - the proper term is 'Star Dreadnought').

 

 

I have no doubt the Enterprise could defeat a superstar destroyer.

 

The burden of proof then falls on you to prove this as the debate has been over for several years (after the Episode 2 ICS came out).

 

In Star Wars, since small ships can destroy those "mighty" Death Stars then I have little confidence in the construction of any ships built for the Empire.

 

Acts of plot that should never have happened as the first Death Star was destroyed by a lucky shot, and the second wasn't compleated yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But there is no doubt: the Enterprise can destroy all the other ships, how i can see every day while I'm playing with one of my great collection of Star Trek videogames.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Enterprise would win, and it wouldn't be very difficult, either. The E can remain at a relatively great distance and lob salvo after salvo of torpedoes at the Super Star Destroyer. Given that the torpedoes should be at least as powerful as thermonuclear devices, the SSD could be chopped up piecemill. SSD shields are good at repelling laser fire, very small asteroids and proton torpedoes, which don't seem to be in the same class as Trek photon torpedoes (and certainly not in the tactical range of quantum torpedoes) from my reading of Star Wars novels (I'm a SW junkie, too - and Battlestar Galactica), but something like a photon torpedo could knock those shields out in one or two hits.

 

SSD turbo-laser fire doesn't seem to have any remarkable range, so I doubt they would even impact the E's deflectors if she maintained a distance of a quarter AU or so. And if the SSD launched it's unshielded tie-fighters, well, the E's tactical computer is capable of engaging multiple targets with the phaser arrays. So much for those gnats.

 

To be honest, given what I've seen of Star Wars starship technology, I'm pretty sure the Federation, Klingons, and maybe the Romulans could successfully engage and defeat the Empire in open warfare.

 

Just my two cents. :assimilated:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this