PDA

View Full Version : Imperial Star Destroyer vs. USS Enterprise


Jae Onasi
03-30-2009, 04:27 PM
The geekiest of all threads....
Which one would survive the battle? And play nice with each other--I like both Star Wars and Star Trek so no trashing each other unless it's clearly meant in fun. ;P

Q
03-30-2009, 04:31 PM
Which Enterprise?

Quanon
03-30-2009, 04:38 PM
Doesn't anyone have a sort of size comparison ?

StarDestroyers are larger ? A lot I think :p

They might not be so nimble like the enterprise, but they got some heavy laser turrets, not to mention a truck load of Tie Fighters to spew out.

Adavardes
03-30-2009, 04:39 PM
This is really hard to judge, really, because Star Wars and Star Trek feature two very different styles of space combat. Star Trek focuses almost all the firepower and combat on the main ships, while Star Wars is more small-range fighters and dogfighting than actual large ship combat. Long range, I'd say the Enterprise, because it's packing more heat by itself and can reach farther, but short range, a Star Destroyer, because it could overwhelm the Enterprise with a swarm of fighters.

Rogue Nine
03-30-2009, 04:40 PM
Which class of Impstar, a One or a Deuce?

jrrtoken
03-30-2009, 04:44 PM
Can't compare, since they're both form different universes, so to speak; so naturally, they have different laws of physics and technologies, such as warp drive/hyperdrive.

jonathan7
03-30-2009, 04:56 PM
http://www.davis.ca/publication/The-End-of-the-Star-Wars-Star-Trek-Debate.pdf

Personally I'd say a ISD would win on the grounds they look cooler.

jrrtoken
03-30-2009, 05:01 PM
http://www.davis.ca/publication/The-End-of-the-Star-Wars-Star-Trek-Debate.pdfChrist, it's all professionally written, as if it's a scientific review. This needs to be considered for the Nobel Physics Prize. :carms:

SW01
03-30-2009, 05:18 PM
StarDestroyers are larger ? A lot I think

ISD II = 1600m in length
Ent E = 685m

Just a slight size difference! :xp:

But, something I've always thought would help decide the outcome was an exchange in The Next Generation (Season 2 - 'The Outrageous Okona'), where laser weapons were mocked as completely ineffective:

Worf, Picard & Riker

"Captain, they are now locking lasers on us."
"Lasers!?"
"Yes, sir."
"Lasers can't even penetrate our navigation shields. Don't they know that?"
"Regulations do call for yellow alert."
"Hmm, a very old regulation. Well, make it so Number One. And, reduce speed... drop main shields, as well."
"May I ask why, sir?"
"In case we decide to surrender to them, Number One... "

Also in that episode they mentioned that the opponent could fire lasers until they ran dry and still not damage the Enterprise.

That, if it applied to Star Wars physics, would probably eliminate the effectiveness of the bulk of an ISDs weaponry...

...but, of course, the argument about differing physics is important, and probably squashes any chance of a good conclusive comparison. :(

EDIT: Just now saw J7's post...ignore last sentence! :lol:

Aash Li
03-30-2009, 05:58 PM
Star Destroyer would win. Why?

Cinematographic proof: how many times have you seen the Enterprise destroyed, compared to a star destroyer? :p

Marius Fett
03-30-2009, 06:01 PM
Which class of Impstar, a One or a Deuce?

Eclipse. ;)

--

Meh, Star Destroyer hands down.

Star Wars pwnz all.. :p

Fredi
03-30-2009, 06:02 PM
I really depends on wish Enterprise and which type of Star Destroyer, but I believe a Star Destroyer would win.

Arcesious
03-30-2009, 06:05 PM
What if the Enterprise E was upgraded with the technology Voyager had in Endgame?

True_Avery
03-30-2009, 06:14 PM
The one with the more rabid fanbase wins.

Chevron 7 locke
03-30-2009, 06:49 PM
I'm gonna say...Enterprise! It has phasers and photon torpedoes. Plus...I don't think Star destroyers are that manuverable when In combat.

jonathan7
03-30-2009, 06:53 PM
I'm gonna say...Enterprise! It has phasers and photon torpedoes. Plus...I don't think Star destroyers are that manuverable when In combat.

One can only presume you didn't read my link...

Rev7
03-30-2009, 07:55 PM
Star Destroyer FTW!

GarfieldJL
03-30-2009, 08:32 PM
I'm gonna say...Enterprise! It has phasers and photon torpedoes. Plus...I don't think Star destroyers are that manuverable when In combat.

Unless it is Archer's Enterprise, I'd have to say the Enterprise.

For Example the Enterprise E compared to a Star Destroyer.

The Star Destroyer has the size and mass advantage.

Hyperdrive rates above warp 9.9 so the Hyperdrive probably can be faster, however that said ships in Hyperspace are blind and stuck going in a straight line, ships with Warp Drive can maneuver while at warp, can see, and fire weapons, it may even be possible for a trek ship to detect a ship in Hyperspace.

Sublight maneuverability, favors the Enterprise at sublight speeds it appears the Enterprise is faster and more maneuverable than a star destroyer.

Power Output, a Star Destroyer's main reactor is impressive in size, but it appears it is fusion based, while every Enterprise we've seen uses Matter/Antimatter giving enormous amount of power that makes the Star Destroyer look underpowered. So power efficiency and power output favors the Trek ship.

Firepower: This is a tough one, in number of weapons the Star Destroyer has the advantage, but in raw firepower the Enterprise holds the advantage, also holds the advantage in targetting as well. Photon Torpedoes pack an enormous punch, and tactics we've seen using phaser arrays would potentially make short work of an ISD's shields since unlike Turbolasers, you can modulate weapon frequencies and phasing to punch through the other ship's shields.

Shields/Armor: From a shielding standpoint the Enterprise has the advantage (except for Archer's ship), from an armor standpoint the ISD has the advantage. However ISDs apparently don't have Structural Integrity Fields to my knowledge and can't use force fields to seal off various parts of the ship. Further as seen in Best of Both Worlds Part II, we've seen that if all else fails you can use the navigational deflector as a weapon (of course the Borg had already adapted to it but it is argued that the attack would have worked).

The Issue of Fighters: Arguably, TIE fighters would be irrelevant in the fight due to their lack of shielding. A common tactic in star trek is to release an antimatter spread to react to the small amounts of matter in space and cause all kind of electromagnetic distortions to throw off targeting locks, the issue with this is that since a TIE has no shields the matter that makes up the TIE interacting with the antimatter = the TIE pretty much being destroyed as matter and antimatter annihilate each other.


Another key advantage is Transporter Technology which can cause all sorts of havoc including potentially beaming a torpedo on to the bridge of the ISD, so it looks like the Enterprise holds most of the advantages despite being smaller.

stoffe
03-30-2009, 08:37 PM
One can only presume you didn't read my link...

How about an A-wing fighter (piloted by a suicidal rebel), vs. a Super Star Destroyer? :p

Prime
03-30-2009, 09:12 PM
Star Destroyer.

Enterprise: We come in peace.
Star Destroyer: You may fire when ready.

LordOfTheFish
03-30-2009, 09:14 PM
ISD. All in all I think it's massive size advantage over the Enterprise would be the determining factor in a battle. The Enterprise may have a maneuverability over the ISD, but to be honest I don't know that it's weapons would even penetrate the ISD's shields.

GarfieldJL
03-30-2009, 10:08 PM
ISD. All in all I think it's massive size advantage over the Enterprise would be the determining factor in a battle. The Enterprise may have a maneuverability over the ISD, but to be honest I don't know that it's weapons would even penetrate the ISD's shields.

Actually I'd say the power output is what would determine who would win, and the Enterprise has the advantage.

E=mc^2 is the deciding factor, in short real life physics can give one a measure of power output for a Star Destroyer vs the Enterprise, and real life physics indicates the Enterprise makes the ISD look like a joke.

Another analogy would be a Romulan Warbird which uses and artificial singularity (an artificial blackhole) to power their ships, a Romulan Warbird is 5x the size of a Galaxy Class Enterprise-D, yet a Galaxy class can stand toe to toe with a Warbird.

The only way I can see an ISD winning was if it were just versing the Saucer Section, because then it would be fusion reactor vs fusion reactor. Once the Stardrive section is involved, the ISD would be in big trouble because of the much higher energy output that one sees with a matter/antimatter reaction.

Energy = mass * the speed of light^2

An ISD doesn't get near that kind of power, while the Enterprise does, it's basic real life physics that come into play, and if in Star Wars the speed of light is much higher than in real life, that makes the Enterprise even more powerful than it is in the Star Trek Universe, for the simple reason of E=mc^2.

We in short have a smaller ship, that generates more power than a ship several times it's size. Bigger isn't always better.

Prime
03-30-2009, 10:17 PM
We in short have a smaller ship, that generates more power than a ship several times it's size. But that power can only be directed to peaceful communications and holodeck fantasy programs. So it still loses.

Jae Onasi
03-30-2009, 10:23 PM
ISDs have hyperdrives--not sure how that is less than warp drive in terms of physics--both go past lightspeed.

GarfieldJL
03-30-2009, 10:43 PM
But that power can only be directed to peaceful communications and holodeck fantasy programs. So it still loses.

There weren't any holodecks on the Enterprise NCC-1701, or Enterprise A, nor Enterprise B.


The Enterprise-D had several times the power of the NCC-1701, the communications systems do not take up that much power, considering they can run full communications on battery power if need be (if the subspace field generators aren't damaged), and transporters on auxilery power (Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan).

Furthermore, the holodecks don't use nearly the amount of power that the Warp Core would be generating, in fact the warp core isn't even usually operating at full power because it would be more power than would be needed.

If you look at the Star Trek the Next Generation Technical Manual, you'd find that during Red Alert, the Warp core is brought to about 80% capacity if I remember correctly. The Defensive shields come online and the Navigational shields go to full power, the weapons systems power up, and all the SIFGs are powered up, the fusion reactors for the Impulse engines are also all brought online as are the backup fusion reactors. Also, during a Red Alert, Holodecks are normally taken offline as are some other systems, in case that power is needed elsewhere.

For reference the SIFGs are what reinforce the outer hull of a Starship, making the ship much stronger and better able to withstand impacts and stresses of acceleration, they are used in conjunction with the Interial Dampening Field Generators. Then to top that off you have the navigational shields at full power, and then on top of that you have the defensive shields up at full strength.

Power from the M/ARC (Matter/Antimatter Reaction Chamber) is used to power the phaser arrays. Antimatter is loaded into the photon torpedos (which can be fired at near lightspeed velocities or FTL velocities if the ship is at Warp).

Furthermore, that is just the Enterprise-D, which was not intended to be a combat vessel, the Sovereign Class (Enterprise-E) was geared more for combat than the Galaxy Class.

The lack of damage done to the ships in Star Trek II, where they weren't pulverizing each other with one phaser hit, is more a testament to the Structural Integrity Field Generators than anything else. Another example can be seen in Star Trek: Nemesis, where the damage should have been far worse if not for the Structural Integrity Fields. A third Example would be Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country, and Star Trek: Generations.

ISDs have hyperdrives--not sure how that is less than warp drive in terms of physics--both go past lightspeed.

Hyperspace is more of shifting out of normal space where you still have mass shadows.

Warp drive actually literally warps space/time around a ship compressing the fabric of space in front of a ship and expanding the fabric of space behind the ship using that to propel the ship forward.

HK-42
03-30-2009, 10:56 PM
I would find the exact hyperspace concordiants of the Enterprise then jump there. The damages would be the price of one ship, evacuate all the crew, etc.

GeneralPloKoon
03-30-2009, 10:56 PM
As the Smash Bros. announcer says, "NO CONTEST!" For the Star Destroyer at least, Ion cannons FTW!

GarfieldJL
03-30-2009, 11:07 PM
I would find the exact hyperspace concordiants of the Enterprise then jump there. The damages would be the price of one ship, evacuate all the crew, etc.

You are assuming the Enterprise wouldn't be able to detect the ISD inbound (which in theory it could considering they can detect transwarp conduits), and/or that the Enterprise wasn't in a gravity well (like in orbit of a planet), which would force the ISD out of hyperspace long before it could run into the Enterprise. Top that off the Enterprise can go to warp in a gravity well, while an ISD cannot enter hyperspace in one.

You're grasping at straws...

As the Smash Bros. announcer says, "NO CONTEST!" For the Star Destroyer at least, Ion cannons FTW!

I don't believe Ion Canons would have much effect, that the shields would be up and Ion Canons operate on the same principle as a solar flare where charged particles disrupt electronic equipment.

In fact considering the Enterprise has entered a Star's Corona (Descent Part II), and they even got a shuttlecraft in a seperate episode to accomplish the same feat. (something I doubt an ISD can copy) It looks like the Enterprise has the advantage yet again.

Titanius Anglesmith
03-30-2009, 11:45 PM
ISDs are combat ships. Their purpose is to intimidate and dominate.

The Enterprise is a peace vessel. It's purpose is to explore strange new worlds.

For that reason alone, an ISD > the Enterprise (Just in battle, though. I would still choose the Enterprise E over an ISD as my personal ship :p)

Q
03-30-2009, 11:54 PM
Star Destroyer.

Enterprise: We come in peace.
Star Destroyer: You may fire when ready.
:D

Yup. Star Destroyer. No contest.

Arcesious
03-31-2009, 12:12 AM
Exhibit A: Enterprise E, fully upgraded.

Advantages:

-Superior manueverability
-Multiphasic phasers
-Adaptive Multiphasic Shields
-A plethora of backup systems and failsafes
-Great system power transfer abilities
-Warp Core
-Quantum and Photon Torpedos
-In upgraded status: deployable armor, croniton torpedos, transphasic torpedos, slipstream warp drive (after all, warp 10 = infinite velocity), cloaking technology, section 31 adaptations

Yeah I think the Enterprise E would win. Armor and size is irrelevent. Star trek technology is far more adaptable than star wars technology...

swphreak
03-31-2009, 12:18 AM
I can't believe I read that whole memo. Where did those numbers come from? :x


I thought Star Wars lasers weren't real laser at all, but plasma or somesuch. Something to do with ionizing gases and stuff. Why else are they mining tibanna gas on Bespin? How will the Enterprise handle having huge chunks of plasma thrown at it?

RedHawke
03-31-2009, 02:58 AM
Power Output, a Star Destroyer's main reactor is impressive in size, but it appears it is fusion based,
Sorry Garfield but Star Wars is an Ion powered universe...

Powering the 1.6 kilometer-long craft is nothing short of a miniature sun -- a solar ionization reactor bulges from the ventral spine, using its raging fires to fuel the giant warship. Link (http://www.starwars.com/databank/starship/imperialstardestroyer/index.html)
It is Ion Power Laddie... and trumps Trek in every way concerning power and power generation... as evidenced below.

Heck, even the spindly little TIE fighters are Ion powered (TIE stands for Twin Ion Engines).

I don't believe Ion Canons would have much effect, that the shields would be up and Ion Canons operate on the same principle as a solar flare where charged particles disrupt electronic equipment.
Ion cannons are specifically meant to overload systems under power... shields are the most vulnerable to the effects of Ion weapons. They are meant to take a ship and crew intact, or reduce a city/continent back to the stone age.

Some of the statements you make as to Trek 'advantages' are not really such... Feel free to hide in that suns corona... at your own peril because that Star Destroyer can and will wait you out and/or simply start pummeling you from afar. There are things you can do but it would be folly to do in combat against a larger and more powerful opponent. You would be 'putting your back to the sea' so to speak, and power that would have gone to your defense, or better yet your offense, would instead be spent on keeping yourself alive from the hostile environment, power you don't have to spare against an ISD.

Real life physics are all fine and good but when you enter the realms of super science you are using certain assumptions that while they are factual as we know them they might not be actually viable with the technology viewed. I have seen people attempt to use real physics to explain things seen on various Sci-Fi and some of them are skewed in that they analyze using a flawed system of 'assumptions' to begin with and these 'assumptions' skews their data even further, usually toward what they are favoring.

Armor and size is irrelevent. Star trek technology is far more adaptable than star wars technology...
Ahem! *Clears throat* Adaptable does not mean better or more powerful though. And Armor and Size do play a big role in a battle between any ships but the key in any sci-fi ship battle is power and Trek is woefully lacking in power generation.

Exhibit A: Scotty in the classic episode Spock's Brain indicated in no uncertain terms that Ion power and technology is far, far beyond their own levels. "Either its a Nuclear pile a thousand miles across... or its Ion Power!" ~ Mr. Scott

TNG Trek technology is more advanced but not that much different that the Classic Trek tech was, same power systems and drive systems, weapons etc. while more damaging and stronger they aren't up to that level of tech. Yes this includes the Romulan Warbird as its systems aren't that stable so the tech hasn't been perfected to its fullest extents possible. Trek is a young universe, with much to learn, I'm certain that given a few thousand years the match up would be far more even.

Being it is out of the mouth of Mr. Scott himself (written by Gene himself) the case for Matter/Anti-Matter/Nuclear-Fusion powered Star Trek trumping Ion Powered Star Wars is a hard one to sell. ;)

Besides this is all irrelevant, my Shadow Cruiser would phase out of Hyperspace and cut both the ships in half and then phase back again with a shrill scream! :xp:

Ghost Down
03-31-2009, 08:33 AM
Star Destroyer for sure!

''I pity da USS Enterprise!''

Prime
03-31-2009, 09:39 AM
There weren't any holodecks on the Enterprise NCC-1701, or Enterprise A, nor Enterprise B.Neither does the SD. Those old types sound less like pleasure yachts and more like real warships!

Darth_Yuthura
03-31-2009, 12:03 PM
I read the ISD vs. Enterprise D comparison and quite frankly, 70 TRILLION GW shield heat dissipation is just outrageous to the ISD. At least if that were true, then it doesn't seem remotely to be accurate compared to what is seen on screen or from the novels.

I think it would be better to compare the attributes from what each could do in the movies, books, and series.

Destroying a planet: It was said that the Death Star carried a Super Laser that was equaled over half the star fleet. That represents thousands of star destroyers. Star destroyers must not be so powerful.

In one Star Trek DS9 episode, The Die is Cast, twenty starships were able to wipe out an entire planet... seven hours of bombardments to destroy everything to the mantle. Those twenty ships combined probably were as massive as two destroyers at maximum. In a future episode 'Broken Link,' even one starship (USS Defiant) could have done the same thing. The second is likely not as reliable as the 20 ships, but that shows just how dangerous a SINGLE starship could be to an entire world.


Causing a supernova: Star Trek TNG and DS9 has been shown to do this very easily. The Sun Crusher was the only ship in SW that could do this... and it was EXPENSIVE as hell.

Explosives: Photon and Quantum torpedoes are comparable to nuclear weapons while proton and concussion missiles are barely better than TNT. Star Trek ships beats out Star Wars in this regard alone.

Phasers: are much more powerful than blasters at the small scale level. A phaser can vaporize where the only thing in SW that could do that were disruptors... only six shots per power cell. Blaster shots from a starship don't have that much destructive energy either compared to a phaser when it comes to penetrating a ship's armour or planet's surface.

Propulsion: Star Wars has only been able to achieve lightspeed... no idea how their galaxy could be that small. Of course, that ISD vs. Enterprise states that 'rough calculations' of the ISD could be 100,000,000 times that... BASED ON WHAT? More likely that hyperspace is like a series of wormholes rather than anything else. ISD maximum speed is never really explained properly at all.

Star Trek ships can achieve speeds thousands of times faster than light at warp. Star Trek ships at impulse also can reach up to 1/4 the speed of light compared to a very slow maximum speed achieved by a Star Destroyer.

Shields: Star Trek beats out Star Wars in this category in almost every way. A fighter-sized ship could ram into the bridge of a Super Star destroyer, but Star Trek shields could withstand BOTH physical and energy to a much greater degree... for instance, the impact of photon torpedos. I can't imagine an ISD being able to withstand an attack by the USS Defiant... a much smaller ship in my perception.

In all: The numbers of both comparisons can't really be measured. The application of a weapon upon a planet's surface, or punishment by a physical impact are all that can really be trusted.

Of course, it's all just fiction.

Darth_Yuthura
03-31-2009, 12:50 PM
Sorry Garfield but Star Wars is an Ion powered universe...

It is Ion Power Laddie... and trumps Trek in every way concerning power and power generation... as evidenced below.
Being it is out of the mouth of Mr. Scott himself (written by Gene himself) the case for Matter/Anti-Matter/Nuclear-Fusion powered Star Trek trumping Ion Powered Star Wars is a hard one to sell. ;)

With all due respect, I would hardly consider that one line from the WORST Star Trek episode ever created... (and most of the original episodes were terrible, I might add) ...to trump everything. You know that if that ONE line were just a continuity mistake, that your whole justification has nothing to stand on?

It's all fiction, but just for the sake of this... I would hardly consider anything in the Original series to stand up to the Star Wars universe. I don't even consider the original series to be in the same category as TNG, DS9, and Voyager. The original Enterprise would break apart under its own mass before it even approached a Star Destroyer. The Enterprise D, Defiant, and Voyager have all demonstrated that they are VERY much beyond the original and Star Wars universe.

Where the Star Destroyer may have a miniature sun, or ion power... (What IS that anyway?) The Enterprise D uses anti-matter and that is WAY beyond atomic energy. Romulan Warbirds are powered by artificial singularities, which are miniature neutron stars. Fusion reactors are essentially the same thing as the energy within a star in that solar ionization reactor.

Holographic technology and cloaking devices are also much more advanced in Star Trek. If a Star Destroyer can't fly into a star, then it's a little hard to explain how it can withstand more punishment for its size than a Star Trek ship that has so much weaker shields. A ship that could cut through a planet's mantel with its phasers likely could outclass turbolasers which can't really do that.

Quite frankly, DS9, TNG, and Voyager take the prize because they actually explain more in detail exactly what their power sources are. Hypermatter, hyperspace, the Force, and Ion energy do not really get explained in SW. (The artificial singularity is one in TNG that isn't either)

CommanderQ
03-31-2009, 01:00 PM
I say that the Star Destroyer would win.

Why? Though Star Wars may be 'a long time ago,' it's still a heckuva more advanced then the Enterprise, as cool as it may be. The Star Destroyer's firepower is absolutley amazing and huge in size, the Enterprise....big gun yes, but in the end, ti would not be able to hold it's own. Oh, that and Earth cannot have as many Enterprises as the Empire has Star Destroyers. Empire has tech, guns, manpower, and numbers. Enterprise, funny uniforms, oldie tech, and Patrick Stewart.

With that combination, who would win?? Eh? Eh?:D

GarfieldJL
03-31-2009, 06:44 PM
Sorry Garfield but Star Wars is an Ion powered universe...

You get Ions from Plasma which means Nuclear Fusion, take a look at what powers our Sun sometime.


It is Ion Power Laddie... and trumps Trek in every way concerning power and power generation... as evidenced below.

Heck, even the spindly little TIE fighters are Ion powered (TIE stands for Twin Ion Engines).

First, which episode, second TIE Fighters have an Ion Drive, to be frank you can create Ions with an electric toaster.

Btw, the Impulse Engines exhaust is Ions, hence an Ion Drive...


Ion cannons are specifically meant to overload systems under power... shields are the most vulnerable to the effects of Ion weapons. They are meant to take a ship and crew intact, or reduce a city/continent back to the stone age.

Not necessarily true, it depends how the shields protect the ship, fact is there was an episode where the Enterprise D was actually managing to move a moon (while it wasn't being attacked by an alien lifeform at the same time).


Some of the statements you make as to Trek 'advantages' are not really such... Feel free to hide in that suns corona... at your own peril because that Star Destroyer can and will wait you out and/or simply start pummeling you from afar. There are things you can do but it would be folly to do in combat against a larger and more powerful opponent. You would be 'putting your back to the sea' so to speak, and power that would have gone to your defense, or better yet your offense, would instead be spent on keeping yourself alive from the hostile environment, power you don't have to spare against an ISD.

Actually the solution is also found in Descent Part II, when the Enterprise triggered a solar eruption to destroy the enemy ship. Fact is though Turbolasers couldn't get an accurate shot if the weapons even had any effect in that kind of environment.


Real life physics are all fine and good but when you enter the realms of super science you are using certain assumptions that while they are factual as we know them they might not be actually viable with the technology viewed. I have seen people attempt to use real physics to explain things seen on various Sci-Fi and some of them are skewed in that they analyze using a flawed system of 'assumptions' to begin with and these 'assumptions' skews their data even further, usually toward what they are favoring.

Well the problem with your statement is that Gene Roddenberry and his successors tried to base as much as they could off of real world physics. E=mc^2 therefore applies which is literally the amount of energy the Enterprise has at it's disposal.

The Star Destroyer's power supply is from Nuclear Fusion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fusion), which we see plasma and ions (hence also where the power for the Turbolasers are generated).

An article on Antimatter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimatter), that would be of interest. The Enterprise uses a combination of Deuterium (an actual Isotope of Hydrogen), and Anti-Deuterium in combination with Dilithium crystals to focus the reaction and heightens the percentage of energy collected.

In fact we're looking at an order of magnitude of 10^4 power here, which quite frankly makes an ISD look like a joke.


Ahem! *Clears throat* Adaptable does not mean better or more powerful though. And Armor and Size do play a big role in a battle between any ships but the key in any sci-fi ship battle is power and Trek is woefully lacking in power generation.

I don't think so...

The reaction of 1 kg of antimatter with 1 kg of matter would produce 1.8×1017 J (180 petajoules) of energy (by the mass-energy equivalence formula E = mc²), or the rough equivalent of 47 megatons of TNT. For comparison, Tsar Bomba, the largest nuclear weapon ever detonated, reacted an estimated yield of 50 Megatons, which required the use of hundreds of kilograms of fissile material (Uranium/Plutonium).--wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimatter)


Exhibit A: Scotty in the classic episode Spock's Brain indicated in no uncertain terms that Ion power and technology is far, far beyond their own levels. "Either its a Nuclear pile a thousand miles across... or its Ion Power!" ~ Mr. Scott

Okay now I know which episode you're referring to, I'm going to be blunt and point out that at the time there wasn't as much known about the laws of physics as is known today. Consider this, we have Ion power today, it's called Ion propulsion which isn't powerful at all. This was contradicted in later episodes seen in Star Trek the Next Generation (Descent: Part II when the ship entered the corona of a star where it would be under enormous ion bombardment (along with various forms of radiation and heat).

Another contradiction was a Trek episode involving the Doomsday Device which used Pure Antiprotons as a weapon (antimatter) and the Enterprise still survived, note in that episode they point out the Impulse Engines are Fusion reactors.


TNG Trek technology is more advanced but not that much different that the Classic Trek tech was, same power systems and drive systems, weapons etc. while more damaging and stronger they aren't up to that level of tech. Yes this includes the Romulan Warbird as its systems aren't that stable so the tech hasn't been perfected to its fullest extents possible. Trek is a young universe, with much to learn, I'm certain that given a few thousand years the match up would be far more even.

It was also refined as we knew more about real life physics, Ion Drive didn't exist then, it does now.


Being it is out of the mouth of Mr. Scott himself (written by Gene himself) the case for Matter/Anti-Matter/Nuclear-Fusion powered Star Trek trumping Ion Powered Star Wars is a hard one to sell. ;)

I think I'd go off the TNG Technical Manual that was partially written by Mr. Roddenberry's successor Rick Berman, and the Physics of Star Trek. Gene wasn't a physicist, and the TNG writing staff actually had physicists contributing to the episodes.

Besides this is all irrelevant, my Shadow Cruiser would phase out of Hyperspace and cut both the ships in half and then phase back again with a shrill scream! :xp:

Hyperdrives don't work in a mass shadow...


The only Advantage the Star Destroyer has is its shear bulk, and the fact that it's about as obese as Jabba the Hutt compared to the Enterprise is the only thing the ISD has going for it.

True_Avery
03-31-2009, 08:25 PM
The one with the more rabid fanbase wins.
Mmmm

Darth_Yuthura
03-31-2009, 08:31 PM
The one with the more rabid fanbase wins.

I'd say the one that you actually can compare with. Star Wars doesn't really explain any of how any of the technology works. They have LIGHTSABERS for god's sake!

True_Avery
03-31-2009, 08:36 PM
I'd say the one that you actually can compare with. Star Wars doesn't really explain any of how any of the technology works. They have LIGHTSABERS for god's sake!
This is true. Putting together scientific information with a universe with the Force, Lightsabers, etc is difficult.

And, well, so is a universe where warp drives and "teleportation" exist. For the most part all of this scientific supposition is BS :p

Oh god, I'm going to be destroyed by trekkies and wookies...

GarfieldJL
03-31-2009, 09:04 PM
And, well, so is a universe where warp drives and "teleportation" exist. For the most part all of this scientific supposition is BS :p

It isn't as far off as you think, theoretically warp drive would work if we could come up with a way to warp space/time. As for transporters, they are closer to reality than you think (they have a long way to go). I'll let you search for the articles.

Mav
03-31-2009, 09:16 PM
they are closer to reality than you think (they have a long way to go)lolwut

Darth_Yuthura
03-31-2009, 09:50 PM
It isn't as far off as you think, theoretically warp drive would work if we could come up with a way to warp space/time. As for transporters, they are closer to reality than you think (they have a long way to go). I'll let you search for the articles.

Maybe transporters could eventually become reality, but the odds of being able to decompile life and rebuild it in working order would be difficult... more like impossible. You probably could transport matter, but it would likely would arrive at its destination as a very fine powder or liquid. The whole transporters thing was just a means for star trek to find a cheap way to move people to and fro without expensive shuttle scenes.

GarfieldJL
04-01-2009, 02:21 PM
Maybe transporters could eventually become reality, but the odds of being able to decompile life and rebuild it in working order would be difficult... more like impossible. You probably could transport matter, but it would likely would arrive at its destination as a very fine powder or liquid. The whole transporters thing was just a means for star trek to find a cheap way to move people to and fro without expensive shuttle scenes.

That's what I mean about them having a long way to go, rudimentry transporter technology does currently exist though.

Tommycat
04-02-2009, 02:49 AM
Ok, here's how it is. Anyone that disagrees with me is wrong.

In a straight up blow for blow battle, the ISD leaves little chunks with federation writing on them floating in space. But then that's not how the Star Trek ship would fight.

Enterprise has far more advanced sensors, and more pinpoint targeting. They can target the bridge for example and completely disable the ISD. Because the Enterprise is more for exploration, it is geared up with sensors that a war ship wouldn't have. The ISD uses manually aimed turrets(as seen in the movies) as it's main guns. The ISD also must have an area that you can fly in and be within it's outer shields(as seen by the X-wings taking out the shield generators, and an a-wing flying through the bridge). So a likely scenario would be as follows.

Enterprise rolls up on the ISD. tries to say hi, and ISD powers up weapons. Enterprise raises shields takes a couple glancing blows that do a lot of damage, and they scram. Enterprise analyzes all of the data gathered from the first battle, and comes up with a plan. They rig a shuttlecraft to detonate it's warp core on impact with the ISD's bridge. Set it's autopilot, and eat popcorn while watching it on screen.

RedHawke
04-02-2009, 02:51 AM
Garfiled... Sorry but Trek Canon would indicate otherwise, as I proved... note nowhere in my post replying to your misconceptions did I state Trek would lose the fight, I did state that power generation would be a key factor and that you were seriously misinformed about the power sources Star Wars had, and just how some of your stated Trek "advantages" were quite awful things to try in a real space battle.

Trek does not out tech Star Wars... to try and prove so is preposterous. One galaxy is thousands (or more) years old with Tech that has been continued and perfected over that time, the other is not, while Trek has some nice toys, they will need a few thousand years to catch up.

And your posting "I don't think so..." in response to my statements of power being a big factor in a space battle proves to me you have no clue about the subject of space combat, I'll elaborate on my statement...

A battle between space ships using energy weapons is all about power generation, maneuverability and armor are factors sure as well as the crews on said ships, but it is a simple matter of your weapons (fed by your power supplies) overwhelming your opponents shield/defensive systems (fed by their power supplies) and this is before their weapons overwhelm your shield systems of course. In this kind of fight power is everything...

Power enables you to move, attack, and defend yourself and in this particular match up the Trek ship is doomed unless it can use its smaller size to keep itself in the aft quadrant of the ISD (where there are less weapons). Either way though no matter the torpedoes or phasers (Trek designs while pretty are not very functional to the kind of combat an ISD is made for) you simply can't get enough weapons/power to bear on the ISD to seriously damage it.

The key to defeating an ISD is equal powered broadsides of massive amounts of energy weaponry overwhelming the shields and armor and damaging critical systems, the Rebel/New Republic MC-80 (for example) can do this while the Enterprise and her sister ships simply cannot.

You would be a mosquito attacking an elephant, yes Quantum/Photon Torpedoes are hefty anti-matter weapons but can't be delivered in a significant enough quantity to deal any sort of real death blow to the ISD, add to that the abysmal arrangements of the Phaser banks/arrays on the typical federation ship allow for no real broadside potentials. You simply can't put enough on target to get the job done... though the aforementioned 'elephant' will likely not be able to swat you either if you are good at maneuvering.

Lastly your statements of "we have Ion power now" is a type of Straw Man argument if I'm not mistaken... sure we can have touched upon said tech but we'll need to come back after 5 thousand or so years and then we'll talk about how powerful it gets in that time.

Star wars is an old universe, Trek is a young one, this is a factor as well in any fight between the two and it is also a factor when you try and analyse things. The laws of physics and such things can and do change as our understanding of the universe expands but you need to be careful when analyzing things, you analysis favors Trek for that is the galaxy you personally like most, so you are determined to back your assumptions about how great it is with any and all data you can, even when you go against the Canon of the universe itself to do so.

To be fair here I'll state my favorite galaxy, which is Babylon 5, so I am not playing favorites to Star Wars here... I find the galaxy of both Trek and Wars to be fun and they have their places in my heart, but they don't enlist the zeal in me you obviously have for Trek. In the end though I would still defer to the canon of the universe even though I may not personally like it or agree with it. The statements about Ion power being so much more advanced in Trek is canon.

The Doomsday Machine used a beam of pure anti-proton, yes... and it sliced planets up to feed the machine, it was also armored in solid neutronium, and was from another galaxy whose obvious tech levels were beyond those of Trek, but it went up against Kirk and we all know how awesome he is (waits for someone to post that Kirk awesome pic). The Doomsday Machine was also the coolest looking ice cream cone I have ever seen. ;)

With all due respect, I would hardly consider that one line from the WORST Star Trek episode ever created... (and most of the original episodes were terrible, I might add) ...to trump everything. You know that if that ONE line were just a continuity mistake, that your whole justification has nothing to stand on?
With all due respect back, your 'opinion' is clouding the facts here, nor is it only one line either. You may not personally like classic Trek yourself and that's ok, but Gene wrote it and we have to accept it, for it is canon.

I'm still on the fence about the whole Midichlorians in Star Wars myself, but it is now canon for Star Wars... my liking it is not a factor, simple as that.

The ISD also must have an area that you can fly in and be within it's outer shields(as seen by the X-wings taking out the shield generators, and an a-wing flying through the bridge). So a likely scenario would be as follows.
There is no 'fly under' zone in the shields. The shields of the Executor had been battered down by Mon Cal fire, enough that before they could refresh them, the X-Wings Torpedoes were able to hit the mark and destroy one of the shield generators.

"Concentrate all fire on that Super Star Destroyer!" wasn't an order given to a single group of snub-fighters I assure you. The Mon Cals did the work there to give that fighter its shot. ;)

Q
04-02-2009, 03:10 AM
Too bad ILM didn't include a shot of the Mon Cal Star Cruisers opening up on the Executor before the fighter attack. It would have made more sense.

I do agree with DY, though. Spock's Brain was a terrible episode. TOS had some very good ones, however.

SpaceAlex
04-02-2009, 03:41 AM
Hmm, shouldn't this be moved over to Kavar's. It seems to be getting quite serious. :D :xp:

Tommycat
04-02-2009, 03:50 AM
There is no 'fly under' zone in the shields. The shields of the Executor had been battered down by Mon Cal fire, enough that before they could refresh them, the X-Wings Torpedoes were able to hit the mark and destroy one of the shield generators.

"Concentrate all fire on that Super Star Destroyer!" wasn't an order given to a single group of snub-fighters I assure you. The Mon Cals did the work there to give that fighter its shot. ;)

Where is that stated. I mean not to dog the moncals, but they weren't doing any damage until the shield generator got wiped. Was it just lucky timing? IF there were no way to get in under the shields, why on earth would they have been worried in ESB about the Falcon coming at their bridge.

At any rate, as I said, straight up fight, ISD hands down. but seeing as how the ISD couldn't even take down a freighter as it moved lazily to the left. The maneuverability of the Enterprise would win the battle. Maneuverability means more than weaponry. If you can't hit it, you can't kill it. As for the tie fighters... they get taken out by the multiple independent arrays. No shields means they get swatted real quick.

True_Avery
04-02-2009, 04:11 AM
Where is that stated. I mean not to dog the moncals, but they weren't doing any damage until the shield generator got wiped. Was it just lucky timing? IF there were no way to get in under the shields, why on earth would they have been worried in ESB about the Falcon coming at their bridge.
Fear reaction? Weight/size limit that the shield can protect against? Cinematography?

There may not be a zone to get under, but the Millennium Falcon is not small. About the size of the bridge itself if I remember, which I'd guess would do considerable damage.

At any rate, as I said, straight up fight, ISD hands down. but seeing as how the ISD couldn't even take down a freighter as it moved lazily to the left. The maneuverability of the Enterprise would win the battle. Maneuverability means more than weaponry. If you can't hit it, you can't kill it. As for the tie fighters... they get taken out by the multiple independent arrays. No shields means they get swatted real quick.
I think it is important to note that they weren't trying to destroy leia's ship, as they needed the information and leia herself. The shots being taken look more like glancing warning shots than actual attempts to destroy the ship.

If we look at the Clone ships in the prequels as examples of ships from a less technologically superior age (as far as star wars goes), then the ISD may have more accuracy and ability than initially thought.

Also, it must be considered that the ISD has a tractor beam that could simply catch the decently sized Enterprise and either bring it in for possible boarding, or just bombardment. Movement means nothing if you can't escape the beam; The Millennium Falcon being caught proves that. Also, ships from 4,000 years back managed to catch the Ebon Hawk in a tractor beam and pull it in with ease.

And even if it couldn't stop the enterprise completely, it would be slowed down enough to be ripped apart but the ISD's superior firepower. The Enterprise, despite its weaponry, is not a war ship.

Plus, ontop of that you have dozens of fighters and bombers attacking the thing while it is being effected by a tractor beam and being hailed with Turbocannon fire. The sheer size, armor, shielding, independent fighters, firepower, and tractor beam technology would overwhelm the poor thing.

A dog might be faster and more agile than a bear, but the chances of a doberman taking down a pissed of grizzly are low. There bear may get some chunks taken out, bit it'll maul the dog long before a death blow is hit. If anything, the dog would be smarter for running away (ala warp speeding the f away)

And I'm not trying to play fangirl here. Just throwing another opinion out there.

EDIT:
Considering the Enterprise is around 300 meters, and the ISD managed to pull in something half its size with ease (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/CR90_corvette), I think it may be feasible that the tractor beam could at least slow down considerably or even stop the Enterprise in its tracks, but may not have the power to pull in. All the Enterprise would have to do is get within 220 kilometers and its over.

Tommycat
04-02-2009, 06:06 AM
Woah woah woah... Remember one important line before they tractored in the corvette.

"Did you hear that? They've shut down the main reactor. We'll be destroyed for sure. This is madness!" C-3PO

Now, I'm not saying in a fair fight the Enterprise would stand a chance. I've just never seen the Enterprise be all too keen on a fair fight. Warp away, or attack from Warp speed(something the Enterprise can do that the ISD cannot). Transport a whole mess of tribbles into their bridge. Enterprise being more for exploration is geared more for sensors and energy stuff.

And as for my couldn't destroy the freighter, I was talking about the escape from Eisley.

And we've seen what Picard would do with the Enterprise. Remember Picard rammed the heck out of the Scimitar. Once there, they could simply beam a photon torpedo(or quantum torpedo) into the main weapons bay of the ISD. The transporter is really the unfair advantage that the Enterprise has. Of course if they ram the bridge, the ISD doesn't have a secondary control center(at least it seems that way from the movies).

We've seen what happens to unshielded ships when they run across the Enterprise as well. *POOF* with the Enterprise barely slowing down. Tie fighters would be like that. pure dust.

Enterprise has more scientists. ISD has more soldiers. Enterprise can navigate through asteroid fields, due to it's maneuverability. And through creative tractorbeaming fling asteroids at the ISD.

edited to add: Another thing that has been seen is the ability for phasers to shoot through shields by matching the phaser output to the target's shield harmonics. Since I have never heard of ISD's having multiphasic shields, I can guess that the rotating phase of the Enterprise's weapons would be able to penetrate their shields as they did with the Borg shields. Keep in mind that the Enterprise E(Soverign Class) was built in preparation for a Borg attack. So it was more of a warship than the Galaxy class(my personal favorite).... ok... now I am starting to show my geek flag....

Darth_Yuthura
04-02-2009, 08:14 AM
Garfiled... Sorry but Trek Canon would indicate otherwise, as I proved...

You would be a mosquito attacking an elephant, yes Quantum/Photon Torpedoes are hefty anti-matter weapons but can't be delivered in a significant enough quantity to deal any sort of real death blow to the ISD, add to that the abysmal arrangements of the Phaser banks/arrays on the typical federation ship allow for no real broadside potentials. You simply can't put enough on target to get the job done... though the aforementioned 'elephant' will likely not be able to swat you either if you are good at maneuvering.

With all due respect back, your 'opinion' is clouding the facts here, nor is it only one line either. You may not personally like classic Trek yourself and that's ok, but Gene wrote it and we have to accept it, for it is canon.

Rodenbarry was not remotely close to a physicist. In later series with more technical input from professionals, it negates much of what would be regarded as cannon. If Gene ignorantly said a ship was protected by a material that sounded high tech, but was really quite weak in nature; then if the ship could take a photon torpedo... or proton torpedo if you wish... then it would be more likely to assume Gene was wrong.

Since when would someone consider a quantum torpedo to be a 'mosquito bite'? Even for a target the size of a star destroyer, a full compliment of quantum torpedos could easily wipe it out. This can be proved 20 starships being capable of wiping out an entire planet. I would hardly imagine that you would need a space station 160 km in diameter in order to match that if Star Wars power is that much greater than from star trek.

One quote DOES NOT negate everything else that shows how much greater anti-matter power is vs. Star Wars power sources. That argument is moot.

GarfieldJL
04-02-2009, 11:39 AM
I'll let Darth_Yuthura debunk the Roddenberry argument, instead of simply repeating her and get back to the physics situation.

Getting back to the power situaton, an ISD utilizes Nuclear Fusion, in this form of a nuclear reaction, an extremely small percentage of the total mass is converted to energy. The rest is converted to Helium (assuming that the ISD is using Hydrogen as a fuel supply (which would be the most fuel efficient).

The telltale sign that the ISD is powered by a Fusion Reactor is the Plasma weapons that the Imperial vessel uses.

In order to sustain a Fusion reaction you also need to use a large amount of energy to produce enough pressure for fusion to occur.


The Enterprise uses matter/antimatter in a sustained reaction where there is a total annihilation of the matter and antimatter to produce energy.

So we're looking at for the Enterprise
For the energy produced per second
Energy=(mass of matter + mass of antimatter) * (speed of light)^2

A fusion reactor of the same size as the M/ARC would be like a candle compared to a volcanic eruption. Additionally the only thing you have to worry about pressure concerning the M/ARC is the amount of energy that the reaction produces, Matter and Antimatter annihilate each other on contact.

The Star Destroyer's main reactor is too small to match the power output that the Enterprise has at its disposal.


We've seen Trek ships survive impacts with minimal to no damage, that would have caused major damage to a Super Star Destroyer. Case in point is whenever a Starship's shields take a hit from a photon torpedo.

Energy of impact = ((mass of antimatter + mass equivalent amount of matter)*c^2)+(mass of the rest of the torpedo)*(speed of the torpedo)^2)

And that is assuming that the target isn't flying into the torpedo, and/or it isn't at FTL velocities which further heighten the energy.

Just because a ship is bigger, doesn't mean it's more powerful, you have to have a look at what powers the ship.


Note:

I haven't thrown in Transphasic Torpedoes which can one-shot Borg Cubes, or the simple fact we can just call in the Defiant have it fly into the large docking bay of the ISD and have it decloak and start shooting...

Astor
04-02-2009, 12:22 PM
or the simple fact we can just call in the Defiant have it fly into the large docking bay of the ISD and have it decloak and start shooting...

While it is true that the Defiant could fit inside the hangar bay of a Star Destroyer (the Defiant is 120m, and we see a Star Destroyer take the 150m long Tantive IV into her hangar in ANH) - going inside and shooting from within would be an incredibly stupid thing to do.

And this is, after all, the USS Enterprise vs. an ISD, not Starfleet vs. an ISD.

CommanderQ
04-02-2009, 12:26 PM
While it is true that the Defiant could fit inside the hangar bay of a Star Destroyer (the Defiant is 120m, and we see a Star Destroyer take the 150m long Tantive IV into her hangar in ANH) - going inside and shooting from within would be an incredibly stupid thing to do.

And this is, after all, the USS Enterprise vs. an ISD, not Starfleet vs. an ISD.

With this statement, I would believe that the ISD would have a clear tactical advantage. Not to mention it probably has a technological advantage, as well. Seeing it is much larger then the Enterprise, I would think that it would be able to carry up to ten times the amount of firepower that the Enterpise has....

Quanon
04-02-2009, 12:39 PM
We've seen what happens to unshielded ships when they run across the Enterprise as well. *POOF* with the Enterprise barely slowing down. Tie fighters would be like that. pure dust.


Its not like they are just waiting to be rammed, TIE fighters are highly mobile, I think the Trek ship would have trouble following them in 3D space without gravity.

Their weapons aren't perhaps that powerfull, but a whole swarm shooting and the ISD, I think it gives them a fair chance.

Both univeres don't really do that, using the 3D space to do dogfights.
Guess its because we never did it in real life before, so theres nothing to follow as example.

IIRC , the OT followed WWII movements to the fights: no clue what Trek follows, reminds me more of sea battles :lol:

GarfieldJL
04-02-2009, 02:24 PM
Its not like they are just waiting to be rammed, TIE fighters are highly mobile, I think the Trek ship would have trouble following them in 3D space without gravity.

TIE fighters also don't have shields.

Rhetorical Question: What would happen to a TIE fighter if it were to fly into a cloud of antimatter?


Their weapons aren't perhaps that powerfull, but a whole swarm shooting and the ISD, I think it gives them a fair chance.

I could argue that the Enterprise can go at least as fast as an A-Wing at sublight. Furthermore, the Enterprise can alter the spread of its phaser fire from narrow beam to a wide beam, to a cone, enabling them to take out multiple TIE fighters at the same time, since TIEs don't have shields.

Fiestainabox
04-02-2009, 02:49 PM
TIE fighters also don't have shields.
Rhetorical Question: What would happen to a TIE fighter if it were to fly into a cloud of antimatter?

IIRC Dan Brown claims it would 'splode.

Also, I remeber reading somewhere that ISD's were partially designed for planetary bombardment, hence their dagger shaped hulls, if I remember correctly, a lot of the laser cannons are designed to shoot dead ahead.

However, this would leave they're ass wide open and vulnerable.

So, without a doubt the ISD would maul the enterprise in a one on one, blow for blow battle, however, it would still be an interesting battle.

Also, you have to take into effect the Captain, if it was Thrawn vs the Enterprise, there enterprise would be dead the moment it left whatever form of hyperspace they have. I'd say nearly the same for Gilad, but not the same for Vader.

DV < Thrawn when it comes to intelligence and cunning.

But also, he'd be on a Stock ISD I assume, if Thrawn had his Chimaera, it would be pretty brutal for the enterprise.


If you gonna include the upgraded Enterprise that was talked about earlier, you gotta upgrade the ISD to Legacy Era Chimaera, matter distorting uber weapons FTW.

SW01
04-02-2009, 03:16 PM
Q would turn up and, after making fun of and taunting Picard and company for about thirty five minutes, remove the ISD from existence. Then berate Picard some more.

Darth_Yuthura
04-02-2009, 03:27 PM
Excuse me... Garfield JL makes a point that an Anti-Matter reaction would dwarf a fusion reaction and that if you compared the Energy/Mass ratio, a Star Trek ship like the Enterprise D would have a much greater output. Even if the ISD were larger and generated more gross energy, it could not direct it as efficiently as a starship with phasers and with shields that could withstand impacts from photon torpedos without breeching their hulls.

Star Destroyers have taken more damage from proton torpedos, which are smaller than photon and less destructive. Laser cannons from a ISD probably can do as much damage to a target a 500 Ib bombs per bolt, but that's nothing compared to torpedos with MEGATONS' worth of destructive energy. And given that trek ships are usually smaller, that would mean that their shields would have to be able to take especially more punishment than an ISD.

Astor
04-02-2009, 03:47 PM
Come on, people. This was just meant to be a bit of fun, not a full-blown scientific comparison.

Jae Onasi
04-02-2009, 05:52 PM
but it went up against Kirk and we all know how awesome he is (waits for someone to post that Kirk awesome pic).

Your wish is my command.

People--keep it fun. This isn't the Senate or Kavar's, for heaven's sake!

GarfieldJL
04-02-2009, 06:02 PM
Excuse me... Garfield JL makes a point that an Anti-Matter reaction would dwarf a fusion reaction and that if you compared the Energy/Mass ratio, a Star Trek ship like the Enterprise D would have a much greater output. Even if the ISD were larger and generated more gross energy, it could not direct it as efficiently as a starship with phasers and with shields that could withstand impacts from photon torpedos without breeching their hulls.

To clarify and add to this argument, I'm saying that despite it's larger size the Star Destroyer probably generates less power due to the amount of energy, but essentially you are correct.

Even if the ISD generates slightly more power overall just because of it's immense size, the fact that we're looking at a smaller ship with as much power at its disposal if not more power throws the entire fight to the Enterprise's favor.

If one was to assume that both ships have the same amount of power at their disposal the ISD is in serious trouble due to the fact its shields have to cover a much larger surface area due to the ISD's bulk. The situation is even worse for the ISD if the Enterprise was to go to warp then leave the Saucer Section (assuming Enterprise D) some place and have the Stardrive come back, because then there is even less surface area that has to be covered, and the Stardrive has the M/ARC.

We've seen examples of incredible accuracy with Starship Phasers, in all honesty before the ISD could mount a serious offense, the Enterprise could just pinpoint target all the turbolasers and take them out with precision targetting.

Judging from multiple TNG episodes, it appears that the Enterprise has an incredible maneuvering advantage and could potentially run circles around the ISD.


Star Destroyers have taken more damage from proton torpedos, which are smaller than photon and less destructive. Laser cannons from a ISD probably can do as much damage to a target a 500 Ib bombs per bolt, but that's nothing compared to torpedos with MEGATONS' worth of destructive energy. And given that trek ships are usually smaller, that would mean that their shields would have to be able to take especially more punishment than an ISD.

I would say the ISD Turbolasers has a higher damage yield than that, but it's largely due to the fact it is a plasma-based weapon (which is also why people over-estimate their actual firepower).

Phasers are set up more to actually cut into a target than lob plasma (which causes most materials to vaporize on contact hence the explosions), while hand phasers can vaporize things (and so can the ship phasers for that matter), they are designed to do precision damage), the fact that phaser fire is usually more focused gives the Enterprise a significant advantage allowing it to literally cut into the ISD's hull like a hot knife through butter.

The reason that people normally under-estimate the destructive power of phasers is due to the fact they neglect a certain piece of Trek technology: Structural Integrity Field Generators.

The structural integrity fields are essentially like another set of shields on top of the navigation shields and combat shielding. These fields are always online, reinforcing the ship's hull, shielding it from debris, adding to its resistence to weapons fire, allowing the ship to withstand the stresses of rapid accelerations, etc. The only time the SIFGs are potentially offline is in spacedock. This is why Trek ships have been seen surviving weaponsfire without sustaining hull breaches and/or the breach not being very serious.

Federation ships tend to be geared to handle the unknown as exploratory vessels, thus giving them added advantages that an ISD does not have because the ISD's shields are set up to deal with known threats like Turbolaser fire. A Federation Starship has shields set up to attempt to protect the ship from everything including the kitchen sink, and you can readily modify the software for the shielding to counter new threats or enhance their ability to protect the ship from a particular known threat.

To give an example we don't even know if the ISD's shield would even slow down a phaser barrage, we do know that the Enterprise's shields will protect the ship from plasma based weapons.

To give a summery:

Size: ISD is larger
Mass: ISD is more massive
Crew: ISD has a larger crew compliment
Power Output: Enterprise likely has a larger power output (lowest estimate would be the same amount of power at its disposal.
Maneuverability: Enterprise holds this advantage
Sublight Speed: Enterprise holds the advantage
Number of Weapons: ISD
Firepower: Probably the Enterprise holds the advantage
Shields: Enterprise holds the advantage due to it's smaller size and thus smaller surface area.

Basically, in a fight the ISD's own size hinders it, the fact the Enterprise is smaller actually means that the ship's energy isn't as dispersed over the vessel. Even if they had even power outputs, the Enterprise would have stronger shields because there wouldn't be nearly the surface area to cover. There are also indications that Phasers would be a type of weapon that the Empire has never before encountered, thus raising the question the effectiveness of the shielding on the ISD. While there are numerous races that use plasma torpedos in Star Trek, so we know the Enterprise's shields will counter Turbolasers. We further know TIE fighters do not have shielding, completely eliminating them as a factor in the battle. There are numerous options at the disposal of the Enterprise crew (including simply beaming the TIE pilots (without their weapons) to the brig.


Moving on to Enterprise E, we have to throw in Quantum Torpedos, even more powerful phasers, and the fact that Enterprise-E according to post-Nemesis books, was outfitted with Transphasic Torpedoes to help counter the Borg. A Borg cube is comparible in size to an ISD, and you can one-shot one of those with a transphasic torpedo.

Tommycat
04-02-2009, 10:24 PM
Your wish is my command.

People--keep it fun. This isn't the Senate or Kavar's, for heaven's sake!

but this is SERIOUS business LOL... which fake ship can beat up the other fake ship.

If you want to use an upgraded ISD feel free. Since they also don't have multiphasic shields, their shield absorption rate is irrelevant. Phasers can be tuned to the shield harmonics, even on the the Galaxy class ships.

Besides, according to the Next Generation Technical Manual, the Enterprise D has an Infinite Improbability Generator. So no matter how outmatched the Enterprise is, it is irrelevant. Enterprise wins by being the one to have an infinite improbability generator.

True_Avery
04-03-2009, 12:04 AM
Enterprise has plot armor and a fan base willing to kill kittens to win, so Enterprise wins.

True story.

Also, I wanna see how much BS science this thread can pull out of its arse before the thread closes!

Q
04-03-2009, 03:54 AM
My BS science is better than your BS science, and I have the BS to prove it!

RedHawke
04-03-2009, 05:28 AM
Garfield @ Yuthura... Canon is canon.

Just because you both think the great maker of Star Trek is somehow lacking scientific knowledge in something and that as a consequence he is now no longer applicable for dictating canon for Star Trek? Even though Gene created it? You actually are trying to pitch to the jury that he is wrong here?

Wow! Just wow! That's true comedy right there! :lol:

Mandalorian54
04-03-2009, 05:35 AM
The Star Destroyer would clearly win, hello it destroys stars. What does the enterprise do? Turn slower than a submarine, that's about it.

Tommycat
04-03-2009, 06:28 AM
Garfield @ Yuthura... Canon is canon.

Just because you both think the great maker of Star Trek is somehow lacking scientific knowledge in something and that as a consequence he is now no longer applicable for dictating canon for Star Trek? Even though Gene created it? You actually are trying to pitch to the jury that he is wrong here?

Wow! Just wow! That's true comedy right there! :lol:
Actually, no, they are saying that later canon disagrees with the earlier canon, and as later canon has more sciency mumbojumbo behind it ONE episode can be discarded when it disagrees with the later science. Also, since Trek is based on OUR timeline, scientific discoveries in our real world override the gosh golly gee of Scotty. SW is not bound by our rules though, as it is for all intents and purposes completely alien. It is not bound by our discoveries.

The Star Destroyer would clearly win, hello it destroys stars. What does the enterprise do? Turn slower than a submarine, that's about it.
Star Destroyer is just a menacing name. A single Star Destroyer alone couldn't destroy a planet. let alone a star.
The entire starfleet couldn't destroy the whole planet. It'd take a thousand ships with more fire power than I've...
And the The Enterprise can turn pretty quick. And considering how the ISD's turn, not much room to talk.

RedHawke
04-03-2009, 06:41 AM
Actually, no, they are saying that later canon disagrees with the earlier canon, and as later canon has more sciency mumbojumbo behind it ONE episode can be discarded when it disagrees with the later science. Also, since Trek is based on OUR timeline, scientific discoveries in our real world override the gosh golly gee of Scotty. SW is not bound by our rules though, as it is for all intents and purposes completely alien. It is not bound by our discoveries.
Still nonsense... canon is canon there have been no real contradictions to it either. Nothing in our current knowledge can override what is the written canon... if so then why have canon?

Nice try, but that argument still loses.

"Sciency mumbojumbo", that's a good one though. ;)

Tommycat
04-03-2009, 07:16 AM
Still nonsense... canon is canon there have been no real contradictions to it either. Nothing in our current knowledge can override what is the written canon... if so then why have canon?

Nice try, but that argument still loses.

"Sciency mumbojumbo", that's a good one though. ;)
Not really. Canon when based on an existing world can be wrong. For instance, Geordi in one episode claims that we had never seen a silicon based life form. Then we find tube worms here that are silicon based. Real world contradicts canon, and therefore that canon is wrong.

Also, FTL ion propulsion was something of a mystery
Ion propulsion is a highly-advanced form of interstellar propulsion. It uses advanced ion power and leaves behind an ion trail. It was hypothesized by the Federation before 2268, but was beyond their capability.
but ion technology was not beyond ST capability
An ion drive is a type of propulsion that uses an electric field to accelerate charged particles and eject them at high velocities (in some designs, the particles approach the speed of light). This type of propulsion is used by many pre-warp civilizations to propel probes and lightweight spacecraft once they are in open space. The thrust produced is quite gentle, often requiring from hours to weeks to reach full velocity.
So using that as the basis of your argument is weak at best.

great... now I went there... I swore I wouldn't... Now I'll never get that smell off me...

Oh, and keep in mind that not listed in the shielding for Enterprise is the deflector array. It's just considered part of the navigation system, but it is like another set of shielding.

oh and the bussard collectors
The Bussard collector normally collects hydrogen, especially deuterium for fuel replenishment but can be reconfigured to collect various gases like sirillium and plasma particles.

jonathan7
04-03-2009, 07:26 AM
I'm sorry but there seems to be a suggestion that somehow the Enterprise, which is basically a science and exploration vehicle (with about two variations of weapons from only a couple of firepoints) has more fire power than a warship about 20 times it size, and several thousands years in advance of the Enterprise technology and above all that a ship specifically designed for war... :rofl:

Fanboys are both greatly amusing, and considerably irritating.

Tommycat
04-03-2009, 07:46 AM
I'm sorry but there seems to be a suggestion that somehow the Enterprise, which is basically a science and exploration vehicle (with about two variations of weapons from only a couple of firepoints) has more fire power than a warship about 20 times it size, and several thousands years in advance of the Enterprise technology and above all that a ship specifically designed for war... :rofl:

Fanboys are both greatly amusing, and considerably irritating.

Hey, I'm not saying that. I'm only saying that a ship designed and crewed to handle the unknown would be more likely to win despite the actual ship's disadvantage(firepower wise).

I would be more likely to believe that the Defiant could take it. That cloak combined with transporter, and a timed detonation of a warhead... say in a weapons hold... or Bridge... would likely win.

Just a note though.. I disagree that the Enterprise generated more power. The sheer size of the ISD's and the number of weapons on them means they had to generate a whole lot of power. It would be like lighting up Vegas. Lots of power required. Now.. could it have had a greater available? possibly. Maybe more of a percentage of reserves. But then they could tell every one on the ISD to turn off the lights.

GarfieldJL
04-03-2009, 10:06 AM
Garfield @ Yuthura... Canon is canon.

Just because you both think the great maker of Star Trek is somehow lacking scientific knowledge in something and that as a consequence he is now no longer applicable for dictating canon for Star Trek? Even though Gene created it? You actually are trying to pitch to the jury that he is wrong here?

Wow! Just wow! That's true comedy right there! :lol:

If canon is contradicted by more recent canon, the more recent canon wins, offhand there was a first Season TNG episode that contradicts your argument on Ion power.

Furthermore, the TNG Technical Manual contradicts your arguement as well, since because of the Fusion reactors on the Impulse Engines, the Enterprise also uses a form of Ion Propulsion at sublight.


@ Jonathan7

I find it amusing that people think that a ship that uses a power source that would rate as secondary and/or emergency power on another ship could possible take on said ship.

The amount of power generated by a Matter/Antimatter reaction makes the ISD's giant Fusion Reactor look pathetic, it's simple physics.

I'm halfway expecting next someone will claim the Death Star was larger than a Dyson Sphere...


@ Tommycat

If you study the information available concerning Turbolasers, you'd find that one of the reasons for Turbolasers being as big as they are, is for cooling to keep them from overheating. This is because Turbolasers are a plasma weapon, which again points to Fusion power.

The amount of power a fusion reactor as seen with an ISD would potentially be enormous, however a matter/antimatter reaction is over 10,000 times that. The key with a fusion reaction is that you wouldn't be getting all of the reaction to occur at once. You have surrounding the reaction, a bunch of Hydrogen that has been stripped of it's electrons and turned into plasma. Pressure is used to increase the temperature and force Nuclear Fusion to occur in the center.

By contrast, the Enterprise just has some Antimatter and Matter collide with each other in the M/ARC (which isn't that hard to accomplish because you don't need to overwhelm degeneracy pressure (if I remember correctly that is the correct term), because Antimatter carries an opposite electrical charge. Opposite charges attract, whereas the ISD has to get two like charges to slam into each other.

A good experiment would be to take two magnets and try to push the two North Poles together, you will have a force that tries to stop you. Now turn one magnet around so that the South end faces the other magnet's north end and watch what happens.

Essentially, the ISD has to use more power input to get it's power output than the Enterprise does, on top of the fact the Enterprise generates more power in the actual reaction.

jonathan7
04-03-2009, 10:12 AM
@ Jonathan7

I find it amusing that people think that a ship that uses a power source that would rate as secondary and/or emergency power on another ship could possible take on said ship.

The amount of power generated by a Matter/Antimatter reaction makes the ISD's giant Fusion Reactor look pathetic, it's simple physics.

I'm halfway expecting next someone will claim the Death Star was larger than a Dyson Sphere...

Because real physics has a place in an imaginary universe where there are midicholorians and an invisible force? The use of Jedi powers goes against physical rules.....

Darth_Yuthura
04-03-2009, 10:25 AM
Garfield @ Yuthura... Canon is canon.

Just because you both think the great maker of Star Trek is somehow lacking scientific knowledge in something and that as a consequence he is now no longer applicable for dictating canon for Star Trek? Even though Gene created it? You actually are trying to pitch to the jury that he is wrong here?

Wow! Just wow! That's true comedy right there! :lol:

Yes, as a matter of fact. I am explicitly stating that Gene's vision of the future was imperfect. A lot of new cannon from Star Trek: TNG contradicts this ONE line from Gene's old cannon. If Gene were right, it either made TNG,DS9, and Voyager riddled with continuity problems... or it was just that Gene was wrong about that one line.

It would be like justifying the Iraq war because of one document that showed Iraq had nuclear weapons... which happened to contradict many others that were more reliable and available to Bush at the time he made the decision.

PS: I would appreciate if Redhawke would stop pressing this issue. The argument on what Scotty said is moot.

GarfieldJL
04-03-2009, 10:52 AM
Because real physics has a place in an imaginary universe where there are midicholorians and an invisible force? The use of Jedi powers goes against physical rules.....

Sorry, but Star Trek Physics is based off of Real Life Physics, and if you argue that Fusion produces more energy in the Wars universe (by the speed of light being faster), the amount of energy generated in a matter/antimatter reaction would also increase.

Again, is there next going to be the claim that the Death Star is larger than a Dyson Sphere...

Quanon
04-03-2009, 02:39 PM
TIE fighters also don't have shields.

Rhetorical Question: What would happen to a TIE fighter if it were to fly into a cloud of antimatter?



Well yes, doesn't mean they can't dodge it. :p


I could argue that the Enterprise can go at least as fast as an A-Wing at sublight. Furthermore, the Enterprise can alter the spread of its phaser fire from narrow beam to a wide beam, to a cone, enabling them to take out multiple TIE fighters at the same time, since TIEs don't have shields.


Its not because you can go fast, you can take fast sharp corners.
Being in space; I guess you can take abrupt corners, since the mass of the ship doesn't give that much pressure and stress on its frame.

Still TIE fighter due to its small size can go fast and do far more crazy twists and turns.

Nor are most pilots complete idiots, so if the Enterprise uses it wide cone shot
other pilots would learn from it :)

I'm not picking real sides, it all by all a cool idea to see them go at each other, whatever universe you like.

Though a second thought, being in space means theres like almost no friction, doesn't that mean when you once set off with a speed, you go faster and faster, even without accelerating/ giving more gass/energie ?

So infact when you once give a trust/ push thing would keep up going faster and faster ?

True_Avery
04-03-2009, 04:41 PM
http://www.wiiwii.tv/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/a-nerd.jpg
NERD RAGE!!!!

I'm sorry, but if you wanna argue real physics in this universe then you could always go to Kavars, but don't act like Star Trek and star Wars physics have complete basis in reality :P

Thread too srs bsns

EDIT: And no, before one of you bites my head off this is not a mod note. This is a concerned suggestion from one nerd to another.

SW01
04-03-2009, 04:53 PM
I had a go at an ISD vs. the Enterprise in Bridge Commander - the results were...interesting...within seconds Enterprise-E had no front shield, then soon after there were the little bits of scrap bearing Federation markings floating about that were mentioned earlier...:(

Now, 8 Enterprises, however, evens the odds a little bit. :lol:

EnderWiggin
04-03-2009, 04:56 PM
PS: I would appreciate if Redhawke would stop pressing this issue. The argument on what Scotty said is moot.

Luckily that's not your call to make. He has presented an argument, and you basically said "Nuh-uh" and put your fingers in your ears. That doesn't mean he has to stop his argument :dozey:

_EW_

GarfieldJL
04-03-2009, 05:18 PM
I had a go at an ISD vs. the Enterprise in Bridge Commander - the results were...interesting...within seconds Enterprise-E had no front shield, then soon after there were the little bits of scrap bearing Federation markings floating about that were mentioned earlier...:(

Now, 8 Enterprises, however, evens the odds a little bit. :lol:

That's because the person that made the Star Destroyer was the same one that thought the Deathstar was larger than a Dyson Sphere. Key here is that it is a mod (created by a Star Wars fanatic), when I installed the Star Destroyer, I completely reworked it's weapons systems so it was more accurate.

For the Record a Dyson sphere would completely enclose a Star at a general radius of 1 AU (the average radius of Earth's orbit). The Death Star is the size of a small moon.

Its not because you can go fast, you can take fast sharp corners.
Being in space; I guess you can take abrupt corners, since the mass of the ship doesn't give that much pressure and stress on its frame.

Actually the mass determines how much inertia you have, the stress on the frame has to do with the acceleration. A TIE fighter is a short range fighter without shields, the Enterprise is basically a Capital ship.

Space does have slight amounts of friction but not a whole lot of it, the key here is the ability to change direction, the Enterprise has been seen pulling off maneuvers that you would expect the Millenium Falcon to make, an ISD does not have the ability to match the Enterprise in maneuverability or come even close to it.

And as far as the cone shots, I'm not sure the TIE Pilots would have a chance to adapt, because it looks like Phaser Beams travel much closer to the speed of light compared to Turbolaser blasts, the TIE Pilots wouldn't have time to react.


Oh just thought of the one ToS episode that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the original Enterprise is more powerful than an ISD.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Doomsday_Machine_(TOS_episode)

The USS Constellation managed to survive a direct hit from a weapon that can destroy planets (albiet worse for wear), and the Enterprise also took a hit from that weapon and survived. If a Constitution Class ship can survive a hit from a weapon that can blow up a planet, it's safe to say a Galaxy Class is more powerful than an ISD.

Mandalorian54
04-03-2009, 05:35 PM
A Star Destroyer could destroy a star, it would just take a while. Pluss a Star Destroyer is operated by capable efficient military officers motivated by fear, where as the USS Enterprise is operated by a bunch of nerds who spend most of their time talking about what they're going to do next and every possible outcome of their interaction with the Star Destroyer and all their secondary subplore reactor devices and junk on their ship that doesn't really do anything but takes a long time to explain.

Ugh, I hate Star Trek so much. So yeah, my oppinion is completely bias.

SW01
04-03-2009, 05:40 PM
That's because the person that made the Star Destroyer was the same one that thought the Deathstar was larger than a Dyson Sphere. Key here is that it is a mod (created by a Star Wars fanatic), when I installed the Star Destroyer, I completely reworked it's weapons systems so it was more accurate.

Now there's a thought...might try that myself so that modded-nearly-god-ships last more than ten seconds after engaging. It's always irked me, especially due to the whole 'lasers can't even breach navigational shields' thing.

And I had hoped someone would bring up the Doomsday Machine - mainly because I knew it was a highly destructive force, but have never seen the episode so don't really know what it was about. I suppose it was the TOS equivalent of a Borg Cube?

EDIT: Though this may be a better link. (http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Planet_killer) ;)

EDIT: After reading, it's actually more of a Death Star...very interesting.

jonathan7
04-03-2009, 05:49 PM
So yeah, my oppinion is completely bias.

That really doesn't make you any different from most people in thread ;)

Mav
04-03-2009, 05:56 PM
Thread too srs bsnsI agree. Therefore my argument... ISD wins because it is hueg liek xbawks

Mandalorian54
04-03-2009, 06:28 PM
That really doesn't make you any different from most people in thread ;)

You left the most important part out of that quote, "I hate Star Trek".

Darth_Xavior
04-03-2009, 06:41 PM
USS Enterprise deffinatly. unless it is a Super . . .

Q
04-03-2009, 07:19 PM
As if we needed more proof that, like Tellarites, certain people will argue for the sake of arguing, no matter how ridiculous the subject matter may be. :roleyess:

Jae, you stinker! :p

jonathan7
04-04-2009, 05:00 AM
Deleted a few off-topic posts, please keep it on topic and friendly peeps, this thread is getting too serious; take a deep breath and chill -- j7

Quanon
04-04-2009, 06:26 AM
Wait a minute, if the Enterprise can have Picard, then the ISD can have Thrawn on the bridge :p

Tommycat
04-04-2009, 06:31 AM
Wait a minute, if the Enterprise can have Picard, then the ISD can have Thrawn on the bridge :p
Doesn't matter. Enterprise has the Infinite Impossibility Generator.
/thread

Darth_Yuthura
04-04-2009, 06:37 AM
Ok everyone, lets have everyone take a deep breath. I think facts have been presented by both sides as to why they think what they think, lets not get personal, and ultimatly I think there is a lot of subjectivity in this thread. -- j7

I have left this in for the record;

I don't want to carry this on, I just want others to know it's not denial.

Astor
04-04-2009, 10:05 AM
Wow. All this science mumbo-jumbo sucked the fun out of this real fast.

Why can't it just be a bit of fun?

Darth_Yuthura
04-04-2009, 12:11 PM
I guess that Star Wars will ultimately win out in this. The simple fact is that there are some who like only SW or ST, but there are some who like both. For those who like Star Trek alone... not too many of them here now, are there?

I like both, but for different reasons. Star Trek revolves a little more around a perfect society and advanced technology based on science from our world today.

Star Wars seems to show a more realistic kind of society that happens to have space ships and laser cannons as common as we have trains and M-16's.

I would give Star Trek the edge mainly because it explains much more about the technology and discoveries where in Star Wars, the technology really doesn't have to be explained. When you come down to it, you can't compare this apple with this orange. We each have our reasons and a little something like statistics and physics won't change people's minds.

We should just accept that here and now that we won't sway the opposite side one way or another.

Astor
04-04-2009, 12:57 PM
I guess that Star Wars will ultimately win out in this. The simple fact is that there are some who like only SW or ST, but there are some who like both. For those who like Star Trek alone... not too many of them here now, are there?

Well, there's not going to be many people on a Star Wars forum who like only Star Trek.

Jedi_Man
04-04-2009, 02:23 PM
In my own personal opinion, The Star Destroyer would win, especially if it had Darth Vader roaming the corridors.
But, the Enterprise has been through alot...
Bah, I vote Super Star Destroyer.
*Steals Super Star Destroyer and takes a joyride*

Jae Onasi
04-04-2009, 03:00 PM
Jae, you stinker! :p
:D
Couldn't resist. Hehe

Kuuki
04-04-2009, 03:27 PM
doesnt anyone know that this sort of discussion will NEVER END!? :joy:

Darth_Yuthura
04-04-2009, 03:54 PM
doesnt anyone know that this sort of discussion will NEVER END!? :joy:

What can we say, it's fun!

Kuuki
04-04-2009, 04:00 PM
meh.

i suppose it's the sort of question that comes from a person who thinks Picard is the better Captain. :D

i mean
COME ON!

7 seasons verses 3! pfft.
sure Kirk's got more movie's, but Picard's got his fair share to compete with him! :xp:

swphreak
04-04-2009, 11:01 PM
Look at what I dug out of my picture archives. I made this when I was on the high school webteam back in the day. We did absolutely nothing but screwing around in that class.


I think it's pretty clear who wins this battle :p

P.S. This was made when I was first learning Photoshop. I am only slightly better now.

RedHawke
04-05-2009, 04:10 AM
If canon is contradicted by more recent canon, the more recent canon wins, offhand there was a first Season TNG episode that contradicts your argument on Ion power.
Having seen all of them I don't remember one single thing that contradicts the earlier statement about Ion power.

But it has been a while. Source?

Furthermore, the TNG Technical Manual contradicts your arguement as well, since because of the Fusion reactors on the Impulse Engines, the Enterprise also uses a form of Ion Propulsion at sublight.
I have also seen technical manuals that present the Impulse Engines on the Enterprise D as standard nuclear power, so what of it? These mean nothing as there are so many out there with varying degrees of anything that can be called accuracy.

It is obvious that you favor Trek, I can respect that, but I do have a right to point out the errors in your logic when they arise, as you do have a right to re-butt it.

I would absolutely love to get you here for a little old fashioned Napoleonic Naval Warfare gaming, and of course the venerable Star Fleet Battles, then maybe some B5 Wars... it would open your eyes on star ship tactics. If I could only get some of my old group back it would be a blast. ;)

You'd be capping a 'T' like a pro in under a week. :D

Not really. Canon when based on an existing world can be wrong. For instance, Geordi in one episode claims that we had never seen a silicon based life form. Then we find tube worms here that are silicon based. Real world contradicts canon, and therefore that canon is wrong.
No matter the changes in your understanding of things in a story like Trek stated canon overrules that for that universe. In the Trek universe they have no tube worms... or they are different than ours, simple as that.

Note: In the Classic episode 'The Devil in the Dark' the Horta is concluded by Spock to be a silicon based life form, so in this case the earlier canon would override the newer one, as a whole episode is based on it, just like in the Ion power issue. I would defer to Gene's statements/written episodes over any of the newer ones as he was the creator of the whole universe, like Lucas can and does with Star Wars.

Tommycat
04-05-2009, 05:03 AM
No matter the changes in your understanding of things in a story like Trek stated canon overrules that for that universe. In the Trek universe they have no tube worms... or they are different than ours, simple as that.

Note: In the Classic episode 'The Devil in the Dark' the Horta is concluded by Spock to be a silicon based life form, so in this case the earlier canon would override the newer one, as a whole episode is based on it, just like in the Ion power issue. I would defer to Gene's statements/written episodes over any of the newer ones as he was the creator of the whole universe, like Lucas can and does with Star Wars.

Wrong. Since the universe that Trek is based on is OUR UNIVERSE. Earth is a part of that universe. It takes place AFTER our events. So it has to take into account our science, and the LATER canon takes precidence over the EARLIER. And really... we're talking about Star Trek here... It isn't exactly the most stable of canon. It isn't like Star Wars where the canon is (mostly) preserved. In one episode, they CAN'T do that. Then the next episode they can. It is very inconsistent.

Q
04-05-2009, 05:47 AM
Oh, come on!

The only thing consistent about Star Wars canon is the massive amount of retconning. :p

Tommycat
04-05-2009, 05:58 AM
Oh, come on!

The only thing consistent about Star Wars canon is the massive amount of retconning. :p

Haha well it's still more consistent than Trek.

Q
04-05-2009, 06:00 AM
They're both guilty of it.

SW01
04-05-2009, 06:53 AM
Look at what I dug out of my picture archives. I made this when I was on the high school webteam back in the day. We did absolutely nothing but screwing around in that class.


I think it's pretty clear who wins this battle :p

Yep...Defiant's clearly comng in to mop up Imperial resistance. :xp:

Good job in having NX-01 being blown up in the centre! :D

I wonder how an Imperial crew would react to a tribble infestation...

And, the 'retconning' in both Wars and Trek is incredibly irritating - the only good thing about Trek is that it is only really the live-action things (and The Animated Series) that contributes to its canon, rather than every novel written on the subject. Some of those make pretty dramatic changes - I remember starting to read one that stated Kirk had not died on Viridian III, and had become active in the TNG era again.

Wedge Suron
04-05-2009, 08:44 AM
Just to establish, which USS Enterprise?

Original? A? B? C? D? E?

Letters and winner

Original? Star Destroyer

A? Star Destroyer

B? Star Destroyer

C? Star Destroyer

D? A Tough battle but Star Destroyer

E would have a fair chance I think. So, it could go either way.

Darth_Yuthura
04-05-2009, 09:50 AM
It is obvious that you favor Trek, I can respect that, but I do have a right to point out the errors in your logic when they arise, as you do have a right to re-butt it.

I would like to point out an error in your logic: It is all based on a single quote. Instead of attempting to reinforce the validity of that one source, why not find more sources to verify what you've claimed?

Ion energy is probably just fusion energy, which is the kind they used in torpedos aboard early star ships. They switch to photon torpedos (anti-matter warheads) because they were more powerful. I would hardly imagine they would suddenly decide to go back using huge buttons instead of touchsceens. Boxes with a speaker instead of devices as small as cell phones. Cartridges instead of flash memory for computers.

Canon is like geoforming and when you have a destructive event like a volcanic eruption, it destroys or deforms the landscape that was once there. It didn't mean there wasn't a forest before, but there clearly wasn't one along the slopes of Mount st Helens. Likewise, new canon dominates and replaces old canon.

EnderWiggin
04-05-2009, 01:17 PM
I would like to point out an error in your logic: It is all based on a single quote.

How is that an error? :confused:

What he said was neither fallacious nor false.

_EW_

GarfieldJL
04-05-2009, 04:10 PM
How is that an error? :confused:

What he said was neither fallacious nor false.

_EW_

It's in error because another episode had the USS Enterprise NCC-1701 survive a direct hit from a weapon designed to completely destroy planets and use the rubble as fuel. To add to that the USS Constellation also survived a hit from that weapon, so it wasn't a fluke.


So we have Kirk's Enterprise surviving a weapon that was the equivalent of the Death Star, and you're telling me that an ISD stands a snowball's chance in hell of taking on the NCC-1701 let alone Enterprise D or E? Seriously, the only way a star destroyer could win is if it was Archer's Enterprise that didn't have decent shielding... By the time the Constitution Class starships rolled out, Trek tech largely surpassed the tech seen in Star Wars.

The single quote that is being used is contradicted by an entire Star Trek Episode and that's just from the original series, there are other episodes in TNG, DS9, and VOY that contradict that one quote. More recent Trek episodes take precidence over the ones in the 60s and entire episodes take precidence over a single quote from an episode, in which you could argue that Scotty happened to be drunk when he said the line.

Q
04-06-2009, 12:30 AM
Ah, you're referring to the Great Cornucopia from Hell:

http://www.daviddarling.info/images/Doomsday_Machine.jpg

Kinda reminds me of where this thread is going:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_m_yEp4yvWQY/R6oOTQdsejI/AAAAAAAAH7g/L9u-FSw7OZg/s320/0.jpg

http://blog.wired.com/geekdad/images/2008/03/27/stdoomsday.jpg

:p

Darth_Yuthura
04-06-2009, 01:05 AM
The single quote that is being used is contradicted by an entire Star Trek Episode and that's just from the original series, there are other episodes in TNG, DS9, and VOY that contradict that one quote. More recent Trek episodes take precidence over the ones in the 60s and entire episodes take precidence over a single quote from an episode, in which you could argue that Scotty happened to be drunk when he said the line.

Thank-you!

Now this episode is divine proof that if the 1701 can take a hit that would destroy a planet; it most certainly is more powerful than a Star Destroyer. This ONE episode proves beyond a doubt that Star Trek shield/power sources are many times greater than Star Wars. A star destroyer couldn't withstand that.

True_Avery
04-06-2009, 01:28 AM
Or we could come to the conclusion that the writers had no idea and still have no idea what they are talking about and trying to piece it together and determine what is "true" and what is not ends up just being as much BS as just making up the science on the spot.

I'm going to go with that.

Tommycat
04-06-2009, 03:25 AM
Or we could come to the conclusion that the writers had no idea and still have no idea what they are talking about and trying to piece it together and determine what is "true" and what is not ends up just being as much BS as just making up the science on the spot.

I'm going to go with that.
seconded

Astor
04-06-2009, 04:58 AM
Ah, you're referring to the Great Cornucopia from Hell:

Kinda reminds me of where this thread is going:

:p

We're already there, man.

Quanon
04-06-2009, 04:59 AM
Or we could come to the conclusion that the writers had no idea and still have no idea what they are talking about and trying to piece it together and determine what is "true" and what is not ends up just being as much BS as just making up the science on the spot.

I'm going to go with that.

True !

Its all made up in the end by people who have no idea what science is and just slap names on things that sound cool :p

But I like the sinister design of the ISD, so it wins the design contest :xp:

GarfieldJL
04-06-2009, 02:01 PM
Or we could come to the conclusion that the writers had no idea and still have no idea what they are talking about and trying to piece it together and determine what is "true" and what is not ends up just being as much BS as just making up the science on the spot.

I'm going to go with that.

In this case the writers did know what they were talking about, hate to break it to you, but that one Trek episode completely debunks the idea that an ISD could actually take on Kirk's Enterprise.


There was another episode involving an alien cloud creature that fed on blood that there was an antimatter bomb used to kill it.

Kirk decides to use himself as bait and remain behind to detonate the bomb. He orders Garrovick back to the ship, but the young officer refuses to abandon his Captain and a fight ensues before Kirk can explain that he does not mean to sacrifice himself. Garrovick winds up on report. The two ready the bomb as the creature draws near. With the creature ready to envelop them, Kirk and Garrovick beam away and the antimatter bomb explodes, annihilating the entity and most of Tycho IV with it. -- Wikipedia summary of Star Trek TOS Episode: Obsession (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsession_(Star_Trek))

I underlined the key word of most of the planet being destroyed, and that was from a device that wasn't anywhere near the size of a Turbolaser, and yet it on explosion it took out most of the planet, and that's what the Enterprise uses to generate fuel.

That's two ToS episodes that directly contradict that one line being used, and prove that an ISD wouldn't stand a chance against the Enterprise.

EnderWiggin
04-06-2009, 04:33 PM
That's two ToS episodes that directly contradict that one line being used, and prove that an ISD wouldn't stand a chance against the Enterprise.

:confused: Actually, what you posted does not 'directly contradict' that line. In fact, it doesn't contradict it at all :)

The first one may, but this one... doesn't.

_EW_

GarfieldJL
04-06-2009, 05:31 PM
:confused: Actually, what you posted does not 'directly contradict' that line. In fact, it doesn't contradict it at all :)

It actually does, since the device that Kirk used was extremely small and could be manipulated without heavy lifters and most of that would have been containment field generators, it counters the line completely and shows that an ISD doesn't stand a chance.

The antimatter used was from the Enterprise's own fuel supply, that explosion was just from what the Enterprise uses for power. Apparently the damage was enough to be visible from orbit, that much power from an object that was smaller than a human being.

A Star Destroyer needs to use a series of turbolaser salvos to cause that kind of damage. Yet the Enterprise crew would just need to use a small amount of their equivalent of what we use gasoline for in automobiles to cause that kind of damage.


The first one may, but this one... doesn't.


Considering that a Photon Torpedo has a matter/antimatter warhead and the device Kirk used was essentially matter/antimatter explosive device, it not only contradicts the line about Ion power (which we can say Scotty had too much Scotch Whiskey), it also makes the idea that an ISD could last even five minutes against the Enterprise NCC-1701 laughable, let alone taking on a Galaxy Class Starship.

To calculate the energy released by a photon torpedo on impact.

E (total energy) = ((mass of matter + mass of antimatter for warhead)*c^2)+(mass of rest of torpedo)*(velocity of torpedo)^2

I believe the standard yield of a photon torpedo at rest translates out to at least 64.4 Megatons and that's without throwing the added damage kinetic energy causes.

A real life example of the damage kinetic energy can do, look at the Gulf of Mexico, which is supposedly caused by a large meteorite.

Proton Torpedos (that X-Wings carry) from Star Wars aren't nearly as large as a photon torpedo and are supposedly a glorified H-Bomb. The Proton torpedos of an X-Wing Starfighter supposedly have the destructive power in the Kiloton range.

Note, it is mentioned in the X-Wing books that a full squadron of X-Wings firing a salvo of torpedos into a Star Destroyer's shields (the same shield area let's say the dorsal side), can down that shield and a tactic is then to roll the ship to present areas where the shields are still up to protect the ship.

12 X-Wings with 2 Proton Torpedo tubes each translates into 48 torpedos. Even if all of them were at 1 Megaton (which wookieepedia (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Proton_torpedo) states that the Torps on an X-Wing are in the Kiloton range) that would translate into 48 megatons to take down the particle shields.

A single Photon Torpedo with 1.5 kg of matter and 1.5 kg of antimatter which by the formula E=mc^2 (wikipedia) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon_torpedo#Photon_torpedoes) would be equivalent to a 64.4 Megaton explosion.

So a single Photon Torpedo has more destructive power than 48 Proton Torpedos and the Enterprise D can fire 10 Photon Torpedos from the same torpedo tube in rapid succession before needing to reload.

If based on the math (from the sources), 1 Photon Torpedo should be able to bring down the shields of an ISD, imagine what the remaining 9 would do to the unshielded hull before the ship could roll over and present another shield to protect the ship... I'm not even sure the ISD would be in one piece after the first volley let alone long enough to do serious damage to a Galaxy Class starship (which has 2 Photon torpedo launchers (3 if the saucer is seperated from the stardrive and is also in the fight)). Photon torpedos have the ability to change direction and home in on a target. So that's an additional 10-20 Torpedoes all coming at the Star Destroyer in rapid succession...

Darth_Yuthura
04-06-2009, 05:53 PM
This was a great thread! It's so amusing to see one side battle another like this. It's almost like two religions clashing over who's god is the one true god.

"What? She killed them with mathematics... what else could it have been?"
~Adam Baldwin playing Jayne in Firefly

I must say I really find this whole thing very interesting and hope that it won't erupt into some kind of war. It's all fictional, but let's not let continuity problems get in the way of real sci-fci evidence... I can't believe I could actually suggest that.

GarfieldJL actually brings a perfect argument that CAN'T really be argued. Translate proton torpedoes to nuclear weapons and they still can bring down a star destroyer's shields and it shows that a single photon torpedo has the same destructive power as 48 (under most favorable estimations of proton torpedo's explosive yield) Clearly, a Galaxy class ship would dominate based on the photon torpedos alone.

Mav
04-06-2009, 06:21 PM
ISD wins because it is hueg liek xbawks>:[

True_Avery
04-06-2009, 07:02 PM
In this case the writers did know what they were talking about, hate to break it to you, but that one Trek episode completely debunks the idea that an ISD could actually take on Kirk's Enterprise.


There was another episode involving an alien cloud creature that fed on blood that there was an antimatter bomb used to kill it.

-- Wikipedia summary of Star Trek TOS Episode: Obsession (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsession_(Star_Trek))

I underlined the key word of most of the planet being destroyed, and that was from a device that wasn't anywhere near the size of a Turbolaser, and yet it on explosion it took out most of the planet, and that's what the Enterprise uses to generate fuel.

That's two ToS episodes that directly contradict that one line being used, and prove that an ISD wouldn't stand a chance against the Enterprise.
I'm going to call you out on an age old story telling device:

Plot

The writers, with themselves limited knowledge on science, tell a story over the course of many many series and use many mechanics to get the hero out of the tight spot. How do we blow up a planet? Well, lets give them this super missile that in other episodes seems to do jack ****! How do we save them from the showdown? How about in this episode their aim is 100% even though in ever episode prior they can't aim at all!

Star Trek, more than Star Wars, is primarily made of plot armor and plot devices. It is a common way to make Friday night television shows. Plot is what makes House immune to vicodin and come up with BS science to explain a BS disease. It is what keeps the Power Rangers alive on an episodic basis.

So, still, with all your science you still have contradictions within the universe. You choose to ignore them entirely while others do not, but it is still simple fact that it happened. By an episodic basis the Ship may be able to pull of attacks and defenses that would have either helped them a lot in another episode or wrapped up another episode's plot in a second.

But then that wouldn't make good episodes.

Thus, this entire thread is basically inconstant plot armor vs the ISD.

I am going to favor the ISP in this because we have yet to see an ISD with plot armor. The fact of the matter is, the Enterprise would win again any single object within the Star Wars universe because it has a bunch of Enterprise loving trekkies as Writers.

And the fact is because you yourself seem to favor the Trek universe, it would probably win against anything else either. Your argument isn't flawless; its just favoritism.

You may as well have the Power Rangers fight the ISD. They never die, they can take pretty much infinite damage, and at the end of the episode they always win. What does that sound like?

Star Trek.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Character_shield

This post wins! -RH

Jeff
04-06-2009, 07:27 PM
Plot is what makes House immune to vicodin and come up with BS science to explain a BS disease.If House was real he could do all those things IRL. :carms:

GarfieldJL
04-06-2009, 07:30 PM
I'm going to call you out on an age old story telling device:


Funny I'm going to call you out because you're disregarding basic math...


64.4 megatons (1 photon torpedo) > 48 megatons (which is the maximum possible yield (being overly generous because it is a weapon with the explosive power in the range of kilotons) for 48 proton torpedos that an X-Wing Squadron could launch in 1 salvo)

A photon torpedo tube can launch 10 photon torpedos in rapid succession.

64.4 x 10 = 644 megatons

Assuming a proton torpedo has a yield of 1 megaton, it would take 644 proton torpedos to match the destructive power of 10 photon torpedos.

Based on the Star Wars: X-Wing series specifically Book 4 "The Bacta War" That kind of firepower would be enough to take out the shields of a Super Star Destroyer in the first salvo.

A Galaxy Class has two photon torpedo tubes that are able to be fired without Saucer seperation when saucer seperation is complete there is a third torpedo tube is available.


The fact a single photon torpedo (real world physics (which matches Trek Physics)) has more destructive power than what an entire squadron of X-Wings can fire all at once (48 proton torpedos) and that can take down the shields of an ISD. A single photon torpedo could take down the shields of an Imperial Star Destroyer.


Also I'm being overly generous to Star Wars here, considering 1 megaton = 1,000 kilotons...

Oh and the Enterprise-E's Quantum torpedoes are 8x as powerful as a standard photon torpedo.

That means a single Quantum Torpedo would have the explosive yield of 515.2 megatons. We've seen the Enterprise-E launch up to 4 in a rapid burst, but supposedly you can launch up to 10 in a rapid burst.

So if we were to go with it being 4 quantum torps we would be looking at 2,060.8 megatons or about 2,061 proton torpedos (being overly generous to Star Wars)

10 Quantum Torpedos we would be looking at: 5,152 megatons or 5,152 proton torpedos (still being overly generous to Star Wars).


Again I'm just going by the numbers, basic units of measure, etc. Charecter shields would be in play if it was a ground fight, but going by the numbers the Imperials wouldn't stand a snowball's chance in hell.

By the numbers, the Enterprise-D looks to be practically an even match for a Super Star Destroyer, and the Enterprise-E by the numbers could tear a Super Star Destroyer to shreds...

:ugh: -RH

True_Avery
04-06-2009, 07:48 PM
Funny I'm going to call you out because you're disregarding basic math...
Basic math? Hahaha, your math is based upon inconstant information from a television show with little to no basis in reality. Excuse me for ignoring most of it.

Lets not mention that the two universes may have different rules on physics, and when placed in the same may universe may change significantly between them.

One universe is ours with BS science, and the other is a universe where the Force and lightsabres exist. They don't follow the same rules, so just comparing the numbers between the two is just as much BS, again, as making the science up on the spot.

And, again, I'm going to have to point out the plot hax in your universe. There are somehow enemies in your Star Trek universe even though an exploratory ship seems to have the firepower to take out a small solar system in 4 shots. That is 20 minute plot resolution at work, not science/math.

Why are the Borg even considered an enemy at all in generation? Just teleport an anti-matter bomb into every single one of their ships and the conflict is over within a few minutes. With the ****ty storyline Star Trek seems to have placed up by your logic, there shouldn't even be a Star Trek to begin with. What is conflict when your PDA can atomize people in 1 shot, and your ship can single handedly take out the entire fleet within 30 seconds?

Either I'm missing something, or you are giving Star Trek way too much credit.

Jeff
04-06-2009, 07:50 PM
OK I have figured out who would win between the two, it would be Star Destroyer because Revan would be pilot and he has huge muscles!!! and would just force crush the enterprise!!!11

And he has really cute buns. --Jae

jonathan7
04-06-2009, 07:55 PM
OK I have figured out who would win between the two, it would be Star Destroyer because Revan would be pilot and he has huge muscles!!! and would just force crush the enterprise!!!11

[/] Thread

*sighs* This thread has become far to serious, and also too geeky to be in Ahto, as such I officially end proceedings; Yoda wins! -- j7