stardestroyer.net forums

[JohnM81 10]

I will admit that the folks at the SDnet forums are a very hostile bunch and attack at pretty much any post that isn't praising SW saga in some way. But they are a bunch that demand evidence so I collected evidence from Brian's excellent work (case studies) and posted a thread basically stating here is a way that ST forces might win a single space engagement utilizing the SW shields and ST anti-matter case studies.

 

Well so far its been a vigorous debate and at this point they are desperately grasping for straws in the face of the volume of Brian's canon evidence. If any of you are interested the thread is:

 

http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=158151

 

And of course Brian, this is the result of your hard work so I tried to cite you and give you credit for your work. (besides I don't want them thinking that ugly mug in the videos is me!! j/k j/k lol)

[Brian Young 11,994]

thanks. I think I probably already deleted the follow up videos I posted from my Dropbox.

Feel free to point them out.

Buzzdroids

Millennium Falcon/Avenger's hull

Anakin's fighter ramming the battle droid in TPM

 

Everyone please be patient with my slow progress. I've been sick for weeks with the thick pollen in the air this time of year, and I can only speak a few consecutive words before a coughing fit. I hope to get some work done soon, but it is difficult right now. Don't give up on me.

[Khas 12,158]

I'm surprised they didn't just call you a troll. Good job. I may not agree with all of Brian's ideas, but it's always funny to see the SDN Hardliner gang get their panties in a twist over, well, anything, really. Bunch of Drama Queens.

 

Note: Due to this board's alliance with Troll Kingdom, and SDN's fear of said board, due to a little incident ten years ago, when TK exposed the SDN mods' dirty laundry by hacking a hidden forum and revealing that many of the stereotypical Trekkie trolls on that board at the time were really mod sockpuppets, I don't really fear any retaliatory action against this board by them. In fact, it was openly admitting that we were allies with TK that drove off some troll from that board who was really being a pain in the ass here.

[Khas 12,158]

Thread moved to "The Neutral Zone", because it involves another board.

[Vince 520]

I'd have to agree the case for a/m beam weapons isn't too strong. There are real life events such as lighting that produce antimatter in levels that can be detected, and disruptors don't act like det weapons but more NDF.

 

By page two i see the argument moved onto how much antimatter could be delivered because of complex storage or w/e. Well i suppose that depends on how many proton torps you could cramp into the shuttle

 

I'd also point out that the bombardment in Die is Cast is not only impossible with the highest stated reactor outputs but also with antimatter beams. Those beams would have to be super-massive to create the teratons/petatons level shock waves using anti-matter. So they simply have to be technobabble NDF weapons which leave residue anti-protons behind after use.

Edited March 24, 2013 by Vince

[Tyralak 12,068]

I'd have to agree the case for a/m beam weapons isn't too strong. There are real life events such as lighting that produce antimatter in levels that can be detected, and disruptors don't act like det weapons but more NDF.

 

By page two i see the argument moved onto how much antimatter could be delivered because of complex storage or w/e. Well i suppose that depends on how many proton torps you could cramp into the shuttle

 

I'd also point out that the bombardment in Die is Cast is not only impossible with the highest stated reactor outputs but also with antimatter beams. Those beams would have to be super-massive to create the teratons/petatons level shock waves using anti-matter. So they simply have to be technobabble NDF weapons which leave residue anti-protons behind after use.

 

Well, I would turn it around this way. There is no mechanism or substance in science which can create the amount of power an ISD is supposed to generate. Without involving magic, or technobabble using an unknown extradimensional substance, there is no possible way for an ISD to generate that sort of power. However, we accept that they MUST be generating that amount of power due to other measurable factors. Similarly, in addition to TDiC, we have numerous TOS episodes which discuss General Order 24, and other episodes where a starship is said to be able to destroy the entire surface of a planet. In VOY "The Omega Directive", a 54 Isoton gravametric charge was said to be sufficient to destroy a small planet. However, other than TDiC, we never SEE these events happen. Why? The same reason in the 60+ years of nuclear weapons, they have only been used twice in war. The political cost, and chance of a runaway arms race is too high. However, in TDiC, this was not an official government sanctioned action. It was a rogue group of military and intelligence organizations. They attacked the Founders' planet with both barrels, so to speak. How could this work, since as you mentioned, the power output isn't large enough to cause that sort of damage? Well, NDF (Or actually NDE, if you want to be precise) weapons cause orders of magnitude higher damage than their power input would allow if the method was DET. Phasers and Disruptors use a fictional particle "Nadions" to disrupt matter at the atomic level, thus liberating the energy contained in the object. Depending on the setting and material, the effect can either be explosive or it can simply disintegrate. The Breen use Phased Polaron beams, another NDE weapon. In TOS: "The Doomsday Machine", the Planet Killer used a pure Antiproton beam to destroy planets into bite sized chunks. Trek is somewhat unique in the fact that most races don't use DET weapons. DET devices are sometimes used as tools for cutting, etc, but rarely as weapons. If they're going to stand by the argument that the power output of a Warbird's reactor precludes a small fleet from inflicting the amount of damage seen in TDiC, then by the same logic, they MUST dismiss the ICS.

[Brian Young 11,994]

Well, in any event, starfighters can and do cause damage to capital warships many times in filmed or televised Star Wars, top level canon. This sometimes doesn't involve friendly turbolaser fire. So we are faced with two options:

1. The starfighters can circumvent these shields, meaning that other ships of similar size and power could as well.

2. The starfighters are powerful enough to overpower these shields, meaning that other ships of similar size and power could as well.

Either of these options allows opposing ships similar in size and power to starfighters to accomplish the task. Given the extrapolated power of these ships, by multiple methods, the second option is a bit suspect.

Those guys are oftentimes right, there is a lot to like about the Empire's military might, but the technology is not perfect. To suggest that a different advanced government, with impressive but vastly different technology, would have no advantage of any kind, is a bit prejudice.

Whether using antimatter or not, a runabout is similar in size to a starfighter, and should have enough firepower to take out unarmored targets once they circumvent the shields. To suggest otherwise, in the face of all those examples, I feel is a bit dogmatic and unfair.

However, I'd also dispute that it would be easy, or they could defeat the armor, or that it would have a high success rate. But in my estimation, it can be done.

[JohnM81 10]

I'd have to agree the case for a/m beam weapons isn't too strong. There are real life events such as lighting that produce antimatter in levels that can be detected, and disruptors don't act like det weapons but more NDF.

 

By page two i see the argument moved onto how much antimatter could be delivered because of complex storage or w/e. Well i suppose that depends on how many proton torps you could cramp into the shuttle

 

I'd also point out that the bombardment in Die is Cast is not only impossible with the highest stated reactor outputs but also with antimatter beams. Those beams would have to be super-massive to create the teratons/petatons level shock waves using anti-matter. So they simply have to be technobabble NDF weapons which leave residue anti-protons behind after use.

 

 

Yeah that seemed to be a sticking point with them, so I posted this just to get over it because I felt it was detracting from the main topic:

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

Just in case this romulan disruptor using antimatter is a sticking point for you all and is detracting from the main topic of this thread there is other canon evidence of a/m (anti-protons) being shot out of federation ships as a particle stream which would work as well.

 

Canon Evidence:

http://www.tubeplus.me/player/1339201/S ... _Blood/%22

Time stamp= 35:55

Time stamp= 43:58

 

You will note that Janeway states that the anti-matter pulse wont do much good against shields as expected antimatter needs direct contact with matter to be effective.

 

 

So there you go MORE canon evidence that anti-matter can be used as a weapon and precedent exists.

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

[JohnM81 10]

thanks. I think I probably already deleted the follow up videos I posted from my Dropbox.

Feel free to point them out.

Buzzdroids

Millennium Falcon/Avenger's hull

Anakin's fighter ramming the battle droid in TPM

 

Everyone please be patient with my slow progress. I've been sick for weeks with the thick pollen in the air this time of year, and I can only speak a few consecutive words before a coughing fit. I hope to get some work done soon, but it is difficult right now. Don't give up on me.

 

 

Thanks, they seemed not to want to accept the canon evidence and it was obvious they didn't even watch the video. It got so bad at one point that I had to spoon feed them with this post:

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

I did. Its okay i'll hold your hand through this once again

 

I would point to time stamp 5:45 - 6:50 of Brian's video.

I would point to time stamp 8:18 - 8:25 of Brian's video.

I would point to time stamp 10:28 - 10:59 of Brian's video.

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

 

These are just select segments of your video that specifically stated a shield (of space ships) was up and then fighters took out the shield generators.

[Tyralak 12,068]

Thanks, they seemed not to want to accept the canon evidence and it was obvious they didn't even watch the video. It got so bad at one point that I had to spoon feed them with this post:

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

I did. Its okay i'll hold your hand through this once again

 

I would point to time stamp 5:45 - 6:50 of Brian's video.

I would point to time stamp 8:18 - 8:25 of Brian's video.

I would point to time stamp 10:28 - 10:59 of Brian's video.

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

 

These are just select segments of your video that specifically stated a shield (of space ships) was up and then fighters took out the shield generators.

 

The valiant effort on your part is appreciated, John. However, many of the folks at SDN, especially those who are true Disciples of Wong, won't accept any evidence. They will demand evidence, and when it's presented to them, they will ignore it. We used to refer to this as the "Wall of Ignorance". Basically, a mental barrier set up by a person to ignore evidence which challenges their belief system. It really is sad, but I do find it amusing that you were able to knock them off guard.

[Khas 12,158]

Sounds similar to the A.T. Field from Evangelion, only, instead of standing for "Absolute Terror", it stands for "Anti-Thought".

[Tyralak 12,068]

Reading a little further in that thread, I found a couple of interesting assumptions. They seem to be assuming that 1. TCW is somehow suspect in it's validity, due to the scoffing way they refer to it. 2. Imperial technology would have somehow advanced significantly in the few years between the Clone Wars and Episode IV. In fact, weapons technology seems to have plateaued for quite some time. Imperial technology doesn't seem to have had any significant advancement since the time of the Old Republic. I also found it funny that they dismissed the bombardment in TDiC as "technobabble weapons" as if 1. it diminishes what happened, and 2. as if SW doesn't also employ technobabble to make weapons and ships do things that are outside the realm of physics.

[Khas 12,158]

I once read somewhere that Lucas once said that technology actually regressed between the prequels and the OT.

 

Would explain why the Death Star plans were on data tapes​.

[JohnM81 10]

Reading a little further in that thread, I found a couple of interesting assumptions. They seem to be assuming that 1. TCW is somehow suspect in it's validity, due to the scoffing way they refer to it. 2. Imperial technology would have somehow advanced significantly in the few years between the Clone Wars and Episode IV. In fact, weapons technology seems to have plateaued for quite some time. Imperial technology doesn't seem to have had any significant advancement since the time of the Old Republic. I also found it funny that they dismissed the bombardment in TDiC as "technobabble weapons" as if 1. it diminishes what happened, and 2. as if SW doesn't also employ technobabble to make weapons and ships do things that are outside the realm of physics.

 

Yeah but the direction of that line of thought died off pretty quickly when they knew I would point to the evidence of the awings as brought up by brian in return of the jedi.

[scvn2812 504]

Well, I would turn it around this way. There is no mechanism or substance in science which can create the amount of power an ISD is supposed to generate. Without involving magic, or technobabble using an unknown extradimensional substance, there is no possible way for an ISD to generate that sort of power. However, we accept that they MUST be generating that amount of power due to other measurable factors. Similarly, in addition to TDiC, we have numerous TOS episodes which discuss General Order 24, and other episodes where a starship is said to be able to destroy the entire surface of a planet. In VOY "The Omega Directive", a 54 Isoton gravametric charge was said to be sufficient to destroy a small planet. However, other than TDiC, we never SEE these events happen. Why? The same reason in the 60+ years of nuclear weapons, they have only been used twice in war. The political cost, and chance of a runaway arms race is too high. However, in TDiC, this was not an official government sanctioned action. It was a rogue group of military and intelligence organizations. They attacked the Founders' planet with both barrels, so to speak. How could this work, since as you mentioned, the power output isn't large enough to cause that sort of damage? Well, NDF (Or actually NDE, if you want to be precise) weapons cause orders of magnitude higher damage than their power input would allow if the method was DET. Phasers and Disruptors use a fictional particle "Nadions" to disrupt matter at the atomic level, thus liberating the energy contained in the object. Depending on the setting and material, the effect can either be explosive or it can simply disintegrate. The Breen use Phased Polaron beams, another NDE weapon. In TOS: "The Doomsday Machine", the Planet Killer used a pure Antiproton beam to destroy planets into bite sized chunks. Trek is somewhat unique in the fact that most races don't use DET weapons. DET devices are sometimes used as tools for cutting, etc, but rarely as weapons. If they're going to stand by the argument that the power output of a Warbird's reactor precludes a small fleet from inflicting the amount of damage seen in TDiC, then by the same logic, they MUST dismiss the ICS.

 

Not really no.

 

Where was this incredible ability of conventional starship weapons to scale up to continental level devastation when it came time to destroy Pegasus or for the E-D to escape from said asteroid? Interpreting TDIC as being the result of standard shipboard weapons circumvents the plot of at least one episode and I think there are other times where such ability would be pretty handy if we dig back through the dozens of pages from the last dust off about phasers.

 

This analogy to ICS not being valid if attributing an inability of Warbirds to pull off planetary destruction due to reactor outputs is flawed in that the TDIC is an outlier that can only be explained through de-canonizing events in other episodes or weapons of mass destruction. The evidence for the conclusions of ICS is not based on prioritizing some film evidence over any other. Your vision of TDIC is incompatible with other evidence like Pegasus. ICS doesn't require kicking out all or part of a movie to be an accurate depiction of the weapons and technology we see on screen. While it does require taking a broader view of the accuracy of the rest of the EU's description of technology and certain events, the EU is a lower degree of canon than the movies. All events in filmed Star Trek are theoretically equal and the best explanation is the one that fits the most evidence. WMDs allows Pegasus to co-exist with TDIC, shipboard conventional weapons being capable of literally stripping a planet of its crust and mantle in less than a day does not. Were that the case, the Enterprise-D would never have needed bother with entering the asteroid to guarantee Pegasus' destruction, she could have evaporated the asteroid in a few minutes and then took her out.

 

If you can plausibly reconcile conventional weapons being responsible for the destruction in The Die is Cast with the times where this would have been a very handy ability to have, then that's the superior theory. However, any theory that rejects other evidence rather than reconciling it automatically has problems if there are viable alternatives.

[Khas 12,158]

Actually, for "The Pegasus", the asteroid had some weird magnetic and gravitational properties. We'd also have to consider the fact that large explosions inside an asteroid would send debris flying everywhere, and the Enterprise could be destroyed by a large enough piece. They'd probably have to dial down the yields to safe levels, for controlled blasts. Not to mention the asteroid in question was fuckin' huge.

[Khas 12,158]

Additionally, the asteroid in question was also unstable. Too much power, and the whole thing comes collapsing on you. You'd need to use short, low-yield, controlled blasts.

[scvn2812 504]

Actually, for "The Pegasus", the asteroid had some weird magnetic and gravitational properties. We'd also have to consider the fact that large explosions inside an asteroid would send debris flying everywhere, and the Enterprise could be destroyed by a large enough piece. They'd probably have to dial down the yields to safe levels, for controlled blasts. Not to mention the asteroid in question was fuckin' huge.

 

What weird magnetic and gravitational properties?

 

Why would there be debris flying everywhere? Phaser effects generally are not like bombs going off. The shaking, sparks etc. on the ships seem to be more related to system failures and overloads than the direct effects of the weapon impacts themselves as the outside shots generally aren't too violent. However, even if the collateral effects of that much matter being made to go away would be a threat to the ship in a confined space, why not destroy it from outside?

 

Size apparently matters not, judge phaser effects by the size of the target do you? As well you should not for the Cardassians and Romulans were planning on shenanigans far in excess of what would be involved in destroying the Pegasus from outside.

 

Edit:

 

Answered my own questions. There's enough odd stuff going on with that asteroid that magnetic and gravitational shifts make accessing Pegasus via shuttle unpalatable.

 

Of interest: Pegasus according to the wiki is roughly 2 kilometers in but Riker is confident they can destroy her with photon torpedoes. This means they are significantly more powerful than hand grenades. (Slight dig at Star Trek: V) This also means that photon torpedoes are most likely the most practical way of disposing of Pegasus even though it would take most of their torpedoes. By implication, using phasers is impractical. There's no reference to any goofy ores being responsible for the gravitational and magnetic effects, so it would be a bit of a reach to say that its because the asteroid is ultra dense or made of some weird material phasers aren't useful for obliterating it from outside.

Edited March 25, 2013 by scvn2812

[Khas 12,158]

It's also because the asteroid was unstable, as I mentioned earlier.

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Asteroid_gamma_601

 

Anyway, BACK ON TOPIC! We're congratulating John on driving SDN into a tizzy here, so, let's get back to that.

[scvn2812 504]

Anyway, the thread on SD.net doesn't really reveal anything new. They basically hashed out the same stuff with regards to shields as we did, except with a bit of derision for TCW. The permeable shield theory fits the evidence. The problem is that its not the only theory that fits the evidence. There's no smoking gun to really affirm with certainty that yes the shields of most major combatants are permeable to physical objects or no they're not, those are all instances where shields didn't go up in time or were already beleaguered by enemy fire. I've argued both sides and still don't know what I think is the most reasonable. Right now I'd say its probably a case of maybe the Death Star relied too heavily on its gun density and fighter wing for defense against strike craft and didn't invest enough in resistance to physical attack and that The Phantom Menace shows that ship shields can keep fighters out (the bombing run on the antennae seems to have failed) and some idiot or droid forgot to raise the landing bay shields after launching fighters. Ships may or may not be able to keep out fighters depending on what angle the fighters are approaching from and from what angles shield energy is prioritized.

 

So 60% of one and 40% of the other. Today at least. Tomorrow, my gut may tell me something else. I'm not seeing a smoking gun for one or the other.

[scvn2812 504]

It's also because the asteroid was unstable, as I mentioned earlier.

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Asteroid_gamma_601

 

Anyway, BACK ON TOPIC! We're congratulating John on driving SDN into a tizzy here, so, let's get back to that.

 

I wouldn't really call that a tizzy. He got them to acknowledge that shield permeability is possible but lost most of his credibility on that issue trying to claim that disruptors are antimatter beams when there's no evidence one way or another if the antiprotons are a side effect, deliberately used and in either case, how important they are to the effectiveness of the beam or that enough antimatter is present in the armaments of a craft that could slip through the shields to make a dent in the hull of a ship. Looks more like a draw to me. Different standards of victory I guess.

[Vince 520]

I didn't mean to contend the weapons bombardment capabilties, only their nature. To recreate the shock-waves with anti-matter beams would have to like mass millions of tons(!) and most weapons we see including smaller disruptors are of the teleport matter away kind. So the most sraight foward explanation is that whatever the pulses are, they leave residue anti-protons behind in amounts that can be detected, like lightening.

 

Anyway kudos to John, the one man army in unfamiliar and hostile territory

Edited March 25, 2013 by Vince

[Vince 520]

Using phasers and proto-torps, i can concede ships being used to similar effect to the SW fighters, but I don't see very much support for them being much more effective tbh(short of close proximity warp core ejects or what not). With the weakness in the shields, Isn't it sort of like a fight where one side has a one cap ship, and the other a fleet of fighter equivalents that can inflict surface damage, with cap ships a million less powerful delivering them?

Fighters can seriously harm ships, but rarely destroy them. It would be quite difficult to root out all sixty of the bunkered xx-9 'turbolaser stations' which themselves may individually wield firepower greater than enterprises reactor output. Or maybe they could use more extreme tactics, finding ways inside the SW ships and ejecting their warp cores?

 

Basically i have difficulty picturing a scene where this weakness could be a game changer in battle, does anybody have any scenario ideas where it could? Or is this something that is to wait for the actual ST v SW case study (i dont mind the wait).

[scvn2812 504]

Its a potential asymmetric warfare tactic. It relegates capital ships to the sidelines as little more than carriers and escorts that need to stay well away from the actual battle. However, if this were a viable tactic, there'd be no capital ships in Star Wars. Fighters operate as an extension of the selection of weapons available to the capital ship, not in place of.

 

Likely this would alter the tactics used by Star Wars. If no enemy ships are staying around to give battle, then there's no reason for Star Wars capital ships to stick around either. They may just drop their fighters and leave, then come back when the battle is over. Imperial and Separatist fighter doctrines revolve around non-hyperdrive equipped fighters and as far as we know, they don't have an equivalent of hyperspace rings like the Republic does. This means they would have to expose their capital ships to hostile action but the density of fire they can throw up is pretty formidable considering the volume of fire in many Clone Wars fights and at Coruscant. So the Empire and Confederacy would be at greater risk deploying their fighters than the Republic.

 

There are areas of ships like hangers where ships are especially vulnerable to transporter bombs. Hangars by their very nature are generally in close proximity to stores of fuel and munitions for their strike wings. Now as has been discussed many, many times: these need not be volatile on their own. Nuclear weapons aren't volatile, nuclear power plants aren't explosively volatile (at least not in a way that damage to them is likely to sink a ship rather than irradiate it) on the other hand, they might be. A damaged fuel silo that stores fuel in a tachyonic form (as has been speculated as a means of letting Star Wars ships haul around the obscene amount of fuel needed to function without becoming immobile lumps of neutronium) might spontaneously convert ALL of its fuel back into baryonic form, summoning dozens of times more fuel than can fit in the space available, antimatter warheads might lose containment etc. We don't really know enough about how their weapons or power systems work to say exactly how vulnerable they are.

 

Generally speaking though, nothing good ever seems to come of fighters firing explosives into hangar bays or holes in starships.

 

Similarly, while only an idiot would design a ship that can't function without its bridge, destroying a bridge can throw a ship into chaos, confusion and malfunction long enough for bad things to happen like the ship taking a nose dive into a nearby Deathstar.

 

In a war like this, someone is going to run out of fighters or fighter equivalents and an attrition war favors Star Wars.

 

On the other hand, scenarios like Death Squadron gets stranded in the Alpha Quadrant with no way home get more perilous for Star Wars as permeable shields would mean that large scale shuttle / fighter attacks can have a chance at negating the threat posed by the superior firepower and shield resilience of Star Destroyers and Executor. If they can wear down Death Squadron's fighter wings and inflict enough damage to force a retreat or fully disarm the task force before Vader gives in to the dark side and starts toasting planets. That is one of the few interesting "VS" scenarios for these two universes that I can think of off the top of my head. I'm not moved by stories where one side is inevitably ground into the dust with no realistic possibility of the tide turning. Its one of the things I found tedious about that incredibly long Trek / B5 crossover I read on Spacebattles or the Salvation War saga from SD.net and every other Honor Harrington novel.

Edited March 25, 2013 by scvn2812

[Jason 27]

Anyway, the thread on SD.net doesn't really reveal anything new. They basically hashed out the same stuff with regards to shields as we did, except with a bit of derision for TCW. The permeable shield theory fits the evidence. The problem is that its not the only theory that fits the evidence. There's no smoking gun to really affirm with certainty that yes the shields of most major combatants are permeable to physical objects or no they're not, those are all instances where shields didn't go up in time or were already beleaguered by enemy fire. I've argued both sides and still don't know what I think is the most reasonable. Right now I'd say its probably a case of maybe the Death Star relied too heavily on its gun density and fighter wing for defense against strike craft and didn't invest enough in resistance to physical attack and that The Phantom Menace shows that ship shields can keep fighters out (the bombing run on the antennae seems to have failed) and some idiot or droid forgot to raise the landing bay shields after launching fighters. Ships may or may not be able to keep out fighters depending on what angle the fighters are approaching from and from what angles shield energy is prioritized.

 

So 60% of one and 40% of the other. Today at least. Tomorrow, my gut may tell me something else. I'm not seeing a smoking gun for one or the other.

Also could armoer involde prevent they do real damage combine shields provide protect all kinds weapons soft sport areas.