USS Enterprise D from Yesterday Enterprise from vs. a Star Destroyer.

[Jason 27]

USS Enterprise D from Yesterday Enterprise was much more military class starship then Galaxy class starships see any other Star Trek shows.

[Jason 27]

Watch this Youtube vidio.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tmk7jCbETIE&feature=youtube_gdata

 

 

 

USS Enterpise D was not shielding the USS Enterpise C from the attacting Birds of prey. She mostly would have destory the three bird of preys.

[Questor 501]

What in that link makes you think that the Enterprise-D wasn't getting its ass kicked?

 

 

 

Just because the guys at the Alamo had to defend a fort doesn't mean that if they'd been able to maneuver, they could have defeated Santa Anna.

[Jason 27]

The fact the USS Enterprise D was able to destroy one of the bird of prey in a number of seconds and the fact USS Enterprise D spending more of it time guarding the USS Enterprise C then attacking Klingon ships. Beyond there was the fact Caption Pricard order the USS Enterprise D to hold fire got into a better places to protect the USS Enterprise C.

[Jason 27]

Yes, I've seen this. You post it every time I say this, and I respond with the same line:

 

 

 

The E-D was undergoing a core breach and we would've seen it go kablooey if it weren't for the fact that the timeline was reset just in the nick of time (and of course it would've been irrelevant as the E-D would've been restored regardless but does rob us not only of a nice explosion but any way out of THIS ENDLESS LOOP OF A STUPID ARGUMENT). Hell, it's in the video, at 3 minutes, Geordi confirms a warp core breach in two minutes. And that was against more or less even odds, strictly numbers-wise.

 

 

 

If the USS Enterpise D had taken the offensive she would take out two of those bird prey if not all three of them. How many times debate over how effective she is as a warship.

[Questor 501]

If the USS Enterpise D had taken the offensive she would take out two of those bird prey if not all three of them. How many times debate over how effective she is as a warship.

 

 

 

Please indicate what the Big E would have done differently on the offensive.

 

 

 

You will provide concrete examples.

[InvaderSkooj 1]

Star Destroyers are more shooty

[Questor 501]

Star Destroyers are more shooty

 

 

 

What do you mean "more shooty"?

[InvaderSkooj 1]

What do you mean "more shooty"?

I am attempting to communicate at his level. More firepower

[Questor 501]

I am attempting to communicate at his level. More firepower

 

 

 

Oh.

 

 

 

What I said before I edited my response was: "Are you in a contest with him to write the most unintelligible post?"

 

 

 

But then I decided that there was the chance you were mocking him, so I pulled in my fangs.

[Airlocke 12,014]

Well, as a mod, I am privy to information none of you guys are, and all I can say is...well, I really probably should think about being easier on him. That's all I can say, and that's all I will say.

 

 

 

The rest of you are free to do as you please, however

 

 

 

 

 

Now I feel hopelessly out of the loop....

[Praeothmin 532]

I would just like to point out that no one knows how powerful these BoP were, and considering they seemed almost as big as the E-D, they were probably a lot more powerful then the smaller ones we've seen in DS9.

 

 

 

So without knowing how these BoP compare to a Galaxy-class ship, and how the GCS compares to an ISD, such a debate is hard to gauge...

 

Although, the E-D from "Yesterday's Enterprise" still suffered from the "sneeze-to-close-and-it-goes-boom" Warp Core syndrome, so the fight may go well for the ISD...

[Jason 27]

USS Enterprise D has shield twice a stronger as the USS Enterprise C. It weapons also a lot more power. While USS Enterprise D from Yesterday Enterprise had no problems blow up a very longer Bird of prey in a few seconds. A USS Enterprise D from the normal TNG timeline had a problem destroy a smell out of date bird of prey took at least a few minuets. For that matter USS Enterprise D phaser banks might will rival the phaser banks on Deep Space Nine Watch way of the warror.

[InvaderSkooj 1]

USS Enterprise D has shield twice a stronger as the USS Enterprise C. It weapons also a lot more power. While USS Enterprise D from Yesterday Enterprise had no problems blow up a very longer Bird of prey in a few seconds. A USS Enterprise D from the normal TNG timeline had a problem destroy a smell out of date bird of prey took at least a few minuets. For that matter USS Enterprise D phaser banks might will rival the phaser banks on Deep Space Nine Watch way of the warror.

Its all fine and dandy if it was Ent-D vs the klingons, nothing shown indicates any superiority to a star destroyer

[Jason 27]

Deep space Nine phaser many times stronger then USS Enterprise did normal Universe. We talking about a starship who has phaser banks are most likely stronger then Deep Space Nine. I could not see a star destroyer with stand that kind fire power for long. While I agree normal universe Galaxy class starship not fight chance against star destroyer. Yesterday Enterprise Galaxy class starship would have Star Destroyer caption raise the white flag.

[Spockwebmaster 0]

Curbstomp in favor of the Enterprise. It has the speed and agility to control the range, it has the range advantage by a factor of 10:1, and it has about a 10:1 firepower advantage on top of that... if we\'re being generous to the ISD, we might choose to give it multi-megaton anti-ship weapons.

 

 

 

In the worst cases, though, we\'re talking about the Enterprise being able to let loose with bombardment-level yields, because the ISD is essentially an immobile target by ST standards.

[InvaderSkooj 1]

Curbstomp in favor of the Enterprise. It has the speed and agility to control the range, it has the range advantage by a factor of 10:1, and it has about a 10:1 firepower advantage on top of that... if we\'re being generous to the ISD, we might choose to give it multi-megaton anti-ship weapons.

Right

 

 

 

In the worst cases, though, we\'re talking about the Enterprise being able to let loose with bombardment-level yields, because the ISD is essentially an immobile target by ST standards.

 

Just like DS9....which they've been known to miss.

[enigma 521]

Curbstomp in favor of the Enterprise. It has the speed and agility to control the range, it has the range advantage by a factor of 10:1, and it has about a 10:1 firepower advantage on top of that... if we\'re being generous to the ISD, we might choose to give it multi-megaton anti-ship weapons.

 

 

 

In the worst cases, though, we\'re talking about the Enterprise being able to let loose with bombardment-level yields, because the ISD is essentially an immobile target by ST standards.

 

 

 

I bet you and jason are bumfuck lovers.

 

 

 

An ISD would easily reach teraton in yield if not more per broadside compared to multi megaton yield from the phasers and torpedoes combined.

 

 

 

The ISD has every reason not to be nimble like a ballerina but then again the E-D and every ST capship move like beached whales. The ISD has an excuse, what's the E-D's?

 

 

 

The ISD will just ram the E-D without slowing down and head straight for earth and succeed in doing what the Borg failed to do. Have Earth surrender.

[Praeothmin 532]

The ISD has every reason not to be nimble like a ballerina but then again the E-D and every ST capship move like beached whales. The ISD has an excuse, what's the E-D's?

 

 

 

The ISD will just ram the E-D without slowing down and head straight for earth and succeed in doing what the Borg failed to do. Have Earth surrender.

 

 

 

Wow, I guess we haven't watched the same shows then...

 

In DS9, in "Emissary", we see an Ambassador and a Nebula class ship do the same type of turns the Falcon does.

 

In "Sacrifice of Angels", we see two Galaxy-Class ships do a flyby on a Galor-class ship, performing a tighter turn then any ISD has ever done.

 

In Nemesis, the two Valdores and the Scimitar were performing 180 degree turns in a very tight arc considering their size...

 

Beached whales indeed...

[InvaderSkooj 1]

Wow, I guess we haven't watched the same shows then...

 

In DS9, in "Emissary", we see an Ambassador and a Nebula class ship do the same type of turns the Falcon does.

 

In "Sacrifice of Angels", we see two Galaxy-Class ships do a flyby on a Galor-class ship, performing a tighter turn then any ISD has ever done.

 

In Nemesis, the two Valdores and the Scimitar were performing 180 degree turns in a very tight arc considering their size...

 

Beached whales indeed...

While more maneuverable than an ISD, ST capital ships havent displayed any agility greater than a Boeing 747 can achieve.

[Praeothmin 532]

While more maneuverable than an ISD, ST capital ships havent displayed any agility greater than a Boeing 747 can achieve.

 

 

 

A boing 747 can do a 180 degree turn in an arc smaller then 2 kilometers?

[Spockwebmaster 0]

 

While more maneuverable than an ISD, ST capital ships havent displayed any agility greater than a Boeing 747 can achieve.

 

 

Typical \"safe\" turn rate, commercial airliner: 3 degrees per second. This is about what we see ISDs do.

 

 

 

Observed full-speed turn rate, \"slow\" Galaxy-class: ~22.5 degrees per second in \"Sacrifice of Angels,\" in a 4 second 90 degree turn while strafing Galor at close range while moving, relative to the Galor, its own length per second or so. In close formation with friends. Yes, it\'s turning sharper than

, which is a much sharper turn than recommended with a 747, and doing so at a much higher speed.

[InvaderSkooj 1]

A boing 747 can do a 180 degree turn in an arc smaller then 2 kilometers?

Yup on the ground

[InvaderSkooj 1]

Observed full-speed turn rate, \"slow\" Galaxy-class: ~22.5 degrees per second in \"Sacrifice of Angels,\" in a 4 second 90 degree turn while strafing Galor at close range while moving, relative to the Galor, its own length per second or so. In close formation with friends. Yes, it\'s turning sharper than

, which is a much sharper turn than recommended with a 747, and doing so at a much higher speed.

You keep mentioning this yet no screen cap or video.

 

 

 

 

 

Sarcasm is lost on the dumb

[Questor 501]

You keep mentioning this yet no screen cap or video.

 

 

 

 

 

Sarcasm is lost on the dumb

 

 

 

Are you two seriously arguing about turn rates?

 

 

 

Both the Galaxy and Star Destroyer have off axis main thrusters. That's going to be a big deal with turn rates. Roll and pitch rates might be a bit relevant in the discussion of pure maneuverability (i.e. when the ship is using maneuvering thrusters only.)