Imperial Star Destroyer Quantification Thread

[Tyralak 12,068]

Let's also not forget the important lesson in this: What a clusterfuck the EU is. It massively contradicts itself. Yes, there are parts of the EU I like. I LOVE the Zhan novels, and the "Essential Guides" are fantastic. However, I provided a direct scan of the article from The Essential Guide to Weapons and Technology which diagrams these as shield generators. Then we have Saxton trying to rewrite Wars to say what he wants, so he sticks the shield generators under the hull. Who's right?

 

 

 

The fact is, that the most reliable sources should be the movies and TCW TV series. The EU should be considered complimentary at best. It shouldn't be as Enigma implies, whatever the EU says goes unless a direct quote or scene contradicts it. I agree with you, Questor that we should use common sense and context, using the films as the highest authority. The EU is distant 3rd in line of canon. It should be treated as such. The EU should be validated by the movies, not the other way around. If something the EU says doesn't fit with the movies or the TV series, then it shouldn't be considered reliable.

 

 

 

Look, I agree with you that those things look like sensor domes, and the context of the movie could be taken either way. They may very well be combination devices. It's hard to say, and with the EU contradicting itself like a schizophrenic mental patient, It's going to remain a topic of debate.

[enigma 521]

This effectively nullifies Tyralak's copy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Dome has both shielding and sensors plus it is armoured.

[Praeothmin 532]

This effectively nullifies Tyralak's copy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Dome has both shielding and sensors plus it is armoured.

 

 

 

Which confirms what I've been saying all along:

 

Those are Shield Generators, and are very targettable sitting on top of the highest structure of an ISD...

 

 

 

This doesn't mean they're easily destroyed, but they do make a very tempting target...

 

 

 

[Tyralak 12,068]

This effectively nullifies Tyralak's copy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Dome has both shielding and sensors plus it is armoured.

 

 

 

Congratulations, Enigma. You just pulled a Jason. You realize this article is much more damning to your cause than mine was, don't you? First of all, I assume this is from the revised edition of The Essential Guide to Weapons and Technology. I don't have any problem with them being both, but it's a terrible design flaw. Also this further proves my point that the EU can't get it's shit straight. Not the difference between the two articles. I understand that, this is an updated edition of the same book. I'm talking about what I mentioned earlier: Saxton trying to re-write Wars by putting shield generators in an entirely different place. And yes, they're armored, but apparently not very well. Did you bother to read the blurb at the bottom?

 

 

 

Armored Shell: The deflector shield generator's armored shell protects against many attacks, but it's not strong enough to defend against a collision with small starships. Suicide attacks can effectively disable a Star Destroyer.

 

 

 

Yes, Star Destroyers essentially have a giant "Kick Me" sign on them.

[enigma 521]

You got to be fucking kidding me Tyralak? Tell me how many Fed starships survive fucking suicide attacks from small starships? Who's being Jason now?

 

 

 

You need help. Really you do.

 

 

 

EDIT: A Federation flagship gets its nacelle clipped and it ends up destroying the whole ship!

[Tyralak 12,068]

That isn't the point and you know it. The point is that the shield generators are ridiculously easy to take out, leaving the rest of the ship a sitting duck. Ripe for an attack by a tiny craft causing a chain reaction of the reactor core. Which gives me a nasty little idea. I'll get back to you in this one. *laughing*

[enigma 521]

You nitpick something in SW that's also a problem in ST. Worse for Trek.

 

 

 

Trekkies here seem to think that nitpicking SW will cover the myriads of failings in ST. Face it. Pit a SD against any Fed ship and bye bye Feddie.

 

 

 

You know what? To preserve my sanity, I am not going to bother debating SW vs. ST. Each side is becoming more Jason-like you'd might as well rename this board to jason.us.

 

 

 

You guys seems to like insulting SDN for being very much sided with SW that you don't even see how much the same you are are here with Trek.

 

 

 

I'm done here with SW vs. ST. I'll focus more on other topics.

[Praeothmin 532]

You nitpick something in SW that's also a problem in ST. Worse for Trek.

 

 

 

Trekkies here seem to think that nitpicking SW will cover the myriads of failings in ST. Face it. Pit a SD against any Fed ship and bye bye Feddie.

 

 

 

You know what? To preserve my sanity, I am not going to bother debating SW vs. ST. Each side is becoming more Jason-like you'd might as well rename this board to jason.us.

 

 

 

You guys seems to like insulting SDN for being very much sided with SW that you don't even see how much the same you are are here with Trek.

 

 

 

I'm done here with SW vs. ST. I'll focus more on other topics.

 

 

 

And again, you do the same thing you accuse us of doing:

 

You took 1 example of a ST ship blowing up when its Necelle blew up and ignored all the others where destroying the Nacelle did nothing to the rest of the ship.

 

You ignore all the times in DS9, in the movies, in ENT, where a Nacelle hit hurts the ship a lot, but does not, in any way, destroy or even completely cripple the ship...

 

 

 

You refuse to admit that these domes, which are sensor/shield generators, are nice, big targets, when we can clearly see they are...

 

You refuse to admit that a tower protruding many meters above the main hull of a ship is an easier target then the top of a slightly curved saucer surface, even when it clearly is...

 

 

 

Unlike Tyralak, I'm not saying you are acting like Jason, you're still far from that, but you're not completely honest in your assessment of SW or ST either.

 

I know a lot of people hate SDN with a vengeance, but my stance is, and alwasy has been (and you can check all my posts pertaining SDN here and on SFJ.net), that they do not evaluate both sides with the same level of honesty, always favoring SW even when they clearly shouldn't, sometimes even ignoring canon facts, and that is why I only went there once, and never will again...

 

 

 

You read my thoughts on SW vs ST, and who would win in a war.

 

I don't think ST is the best in everything, and I'm honest enough to admit it.

 

I think this is what is lacking very much in the vs debate:

 

Honesty!

 

 

 

Anyways, it is your right to stop debating in the vs threads, and I respect that.

 

But don't lump us all in the same boat when we clearly shouldn't be...

[Tyralak 12,068]

You nitpick something in SW that's also a problem in ST. Worse for Trek.

 

 

 

You're just now figuring this out? This is the way it's been for the entire existence of this debate. Each side nitpicks the other. That's what keeps it fun. When has it ever been any different?

 

 

 

Trekkies here seem to think that nitpicking SW will cover the myriads of failings in ST. Face it. Pit a SD against any Fed ship and bye bye Feddie.

 

 

 

I think that's why you're getting so upset. I'm showing that assumption to be wrong, and you're having trouble handling this pimpin'.

 

 

 

You know what? To preserve my sanity, I am not going to bother debating SW vs. ST. Each side is becoming more Jason-like you'd might as well rename this board to jason.us.

 

 

 

You guys seems to like insulting SDN for being very much sided with SW that you don't even see how much the same you are are here with Trek.

 

 

 

I criticize SDN for all kinds of things. Arrogance, intolerance, bullying, censorship, elitism, heavy handed administration and moderating, hypocrisy, and dishonesty. One thing I don't criticize them for is being pro-wars. It's merely a fact, and there's nothing whatsoever wrong with it. Let's get one things straight. *I* am pro-trek. The SITE isn't. Yes, I chose a Trek naming theme for the forums, but that's because the names fit. I don't control the direction of debate. I don't censor dissenting opinions. I don't ban people for disagreeing with me. People are free to do what they want, express whatever point of view they have. FREELY without the fear of being shut down. The only thing I ask is that you don't do things to get me in trouble. Other than that, do what you want. Can you say the same for SDN? I also don't have a staff full of yes men. Let's take a look at my staff members, shall we?

 

 

 

Admins

 

Tyralak (pro-trek)

 

Paul (pro-trek)

 

Mirah (pro-halo)

 

 

 

Moderators - Security

 

Questor (pro-wars)

 

RayCav (pro-wars)

 

 

 

Moderators - Forum

 

ESAD - Speakeasy (troll)

 

Enigma - Brig (pro-wars)

 

Ali-Sama - Vulcan Science Academy (pro-trek)

 

 

 

Now, does it appear to you that this place is a "Trekkie SDN"?

 

 

 

I'm done here with SW vs. ST. I'll focus more on other topics.

 

 

 

That's up to you. There's all kinds of topics and areas to choose from. Don't let one topic get you frustrated.

[Tyralak 12,068]

To clarify, Praeothmin. I wasn't calling him Jason, or saying he was anything like Jason. I said he was "Pulling a Jason" meaning he used an example which hurt his own argument.

[paul 11,988]

Just as an fyi - i dont give a shit about SDN's debates etc.

 

 

 

It's just shitty software, run on a stupid fucking cable modem at a house costing the owner way too much money when he could pay 10 bucks and have it hosted (and please spare me his reasons because they're full of shit.)

[Questor 501]

Congratulations, Enigma. You just pulled a Jason. You realize this article is much more damning to your cause than mine was, don't you? First of all, I assume this is from the revised edition of The Essential Guide to Weapons and Technology. I don't have any problem with them being both, but it's a terrible design flaw.

 

 

 

OK, stupid queston, if it took an entire fleet to bring down the shields, does it really matter where the generators are? I'm assuming that once the shields are down, the real fun begins. There's no way to effectively armor something against the kind of energy we're already talking about here.

 

 

 

 

Also this further proves my point that the EU can't get it's shit straight. Not the difference between the two articles. I understand that, this is an updated edition of the same book. I'm talking about what I mentioned earlier: Saxton trying to re-write Wars by putting shield generators in an entirely different place. And yes, they're armored, but apparently not very well. Did you bother to read the blurb at the bottom?

 

 

 

 

And why does ST get a pass on being even more inconsistent with its main canon than the EU?

 

 

 

 

Armored Shell: The deflector shield generator's armored shell protects against many attacks, but it's not strong enough to defend against a collision with small starships. Suicide attacks can effectively disable a Star Destroyer.

 

 

 

Yes, Star Destroyers essentially have a giant "Kick Me" sign on them.

 

 

 

 

What's a small starship? A carrack class cruiser? A Nebulon-B frigate? Remember, this is a universe where a SD is considered (at best) a medium sized ship. How well is the E-D going to stand up to having the Defiant ram it?

[Questor 501]

Incredible Cross Section.

 

The AotC one started the 200Gton nonsense and Saxton's association to the Great Evil^tm by Rabid Trekkies...

 

Me, I just think he didn't gat all his facts straight...

 

 

 

200GT isn't completely out of line - especially as we've never seen shot we can prove came from a heavy turbolaser hit anything that we can calculate.

 

 

 

 

We know for a fact that SW shield Generators aren't always palced in the most inteligent location (RotS's hangar shields), so since SW forces do seem to place them anywhere easily targettable, then why couldn't those globes be Generators?

 

I find it funny that the vaunted Ãœber powerful shields of an ISD wouldn't keep their Generators safe...

 

And if these globes are Shield Generators, then they have overlapping fields making them even more powerful...

 

 

 

All I've been saying since the get go, is that these Shield Generators are easily targettable, not that they are easily destroyed...

 

 

 

 

Once again, when an entire fleet pounds on a shield, why do you think that it would stand up long anyway? It's not like immune zone theory every really even worked in battleships, much less energy weapons.

 

 

 

 

Really?

 

Has someone done the math on this?

 

If we scale down the Acclamator's 50Gton guns quadratically, we get hand weapons' power results in accordance to the movies?

 

 

 

 

Given just about any three points, some kind of quadratic will end up as a line of best fit. How about this. Giving a 1cm weapon a energy of 20000 J (equivelent to a .50 cal) and setting 50GT at 450 cm, how'a y = 20000 x^5.935424128? y is energy in joules, x is barrel diameter in centemeters. I assumed the 50GT guns were 5 meters in diameter. I know its not quadratic, but it does fit your two points.

 

 

 

On a separate note, I don't think there necessarily needs to be a relationship between blasters, laser cannons, turbolasers and superlasers (which I call combining lasers). They could all have different functions which would give each a different energy curve. The difference might be something as simple as an analogue to muzzle velocity variable that puts rifles in a whole different class from pistols with the same size projectile. Superlasers for darn sure belong in their own progression.

[Tyralak 12,068]

200GT isn't completely out of line - especially as we've never seen shot we can prove came from a heavy turbolaser hit anything that we can calculate.

 

 

 

This is exactly what I was talking about earlier regarding the EU and canon. The idea that anything the EU says is to be taken as gospel first, unless there is a direct example in the films or TCW contradicting it. This is patently ridiculous. The EU must be CONSISTENT with the movies, not just "not contradicted by". Hypothetical example: Let's say an EU reference book profiles Anakin as having the power to crush a planet to dust with his thoughts. According to the way ICS apologists view it, that should be taken as fact, since there was no dialogue in the movie showing that he COULDN'T crush a planet to dust with his thoughts. Does it make any sense whatsoever or fit with the movies or TCW? OF COURSE NOT! It's insane. The same can be said about Saxton's 200GT figures. There is nothing in the movies or TCW showing firepower even APPROACHING the GT range on ANYTHING other than the Superlaser. In fact, there's nothing in the rest of the EU to support his GT claims. Yet we're supposed to take it at face value and ignore everything else in G and T canon.

[InvaderSkooj 1]

This is exactly what I was talking about earlier regarding the EU and canon. The idea that anything the EU says is to be taken as gospel first, unless there is a direct example in the films or TCW contradicting it. This is patently ridiculous. The EU must be CONSISTENT with the movies, not just "not contradicted by". Hypothetical example: Let's say an EU reference book profiles Anakin as having the power to crush a planet to dust with his thoughts. According to the way ICS apologists view it, that should be taken as fact, since there was no dialogue in the movie showing that he COULDN'T crush a planet to dust with his thoughts. Does it make any sense whatsoever or fit with the movies or TCW? OF COURSE NOT! It's insane. The same can be said about Saxton's 200GT figures.

TRANSLATION: We should ignore everything not seen in the movies, because I don't like it

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There is nothing in the movies or TCW showing firepower even APPROACHING the GT range on ANYTHING other than the Superlaser. In fact, there's nothing in the rest of the EU to support his GT claims. Yet we're supposed to take it at face value and ignore everything else in G and T canon.

 

For someone who claims to like the Zahn novels you seem to have no idea what they contain. A major plot point of the Hand of Thrawn duology, was the Imperial depopulation of Caamas, and the attempt to do the same thing to Bothawui with 3 cloaked ISDs.Complete destruction of life on an earthlike planet in less than 24 hours requires millions of gigatons at a minimum. Just one source from something you you profess to like. There is hardly "nothing" to support gigaton firepower, it just requires critical thinking or is in the level of canon you feel should be ignored unless directly referenced in the movies, or cartoon.

 

 

 

On the same token we should ignore the contradictory elements of ST canon, since they dont fit in with with the theme of the series. Things like weapons of mass destruction, which dont fit in with the peaceful, diplomatic, explorers of the UFP starting in the 24th century.

[Questor 501]

This is exactly what I was talking about earlier regarding the EU and canon. The idea that anything the EU says is to be taken as gospel first, unless there is a direct example in the films or TCW contradicting it. This is patently ridiculous. The EU must be CONSISTENT with the movies, not just "not contradicted by". Hypothetical example: Let's say an EU reference book profiles Anakin as having the power to crush a planet to dust with his thoughts. According to the way ICS apologists view it, that should be taken as fact, since there was no dialogue in the movie showing that he COULDN'T crush a planet to dust with his thoughts. Does it make any sense whatsoever or fit with the movies or TCW? OF COURSE NOT! It's insane. The same can be said about Saxton's 200GT figures. There is nothing in the movies or TCW showing firepower even APPROACHING the GT range on ANYTHING other than the Superlaser. In fact, there's nothing in the rest of the EU to support his GT claims. Yet we're supposed to take it at face value and ignore everything else in G and T canon.

 

 

 

OK, I should have said this (which is pretty close to my original draft:

 

 

 

200GT, which is not necessarily supported in canon, but it does put a single figure to something that I recall having a ridiculously large range of figures. As we have very few - or no - calculable shots from any kind of turbolaser. Throwing out the asteroid vaporization calcs - which many trekkies insist must be done do to foreshortening. we now have one reliable blast. This forces the use of possibly unreliable methods of calculation. Chief among those is reactor scaling.

 

 

 

If you assume that the Death Star is capable of firing the superlaser from generated onboard power, if we take the 2e32J figure needed to overcome the gravitational binding energy, and assume that this energy is available for weapons at all times from the Death Star's reactor, we can begin to calculate. The DS1's diameter was 160km, and the reactor (from both EPIV and EP2) appears to be about 1/10th that. That gives a volume of the reactor as 2144660584850.7734 m³. We can generalize this assumption to mean that Star Wars reactors generate around 9e19J/m³. The reactor bulb of a Star Destroyer is sphere roughly 400m in diameter. (working from the protruding bulb) giving it a volume of about 268082573 m³. Assuming the energy density previously, you get a power output (for weapons) of 2.4e28. For the 8 octuple mounts of an ISD2, that gives an output per mount of 3e27J or 7e8GT per mount. Even assuming that the Death Star could only fire once every day, you get 8,101 GT per volley per mount. The number gets ridiculously larger if you use the more accurate (from observation) number for the Death Star of 4e37J.

 

 

 

Given that calculation, 200GT is a reasonable number, and even on the small side.

 

 

 

EDIT: I revised because I did not feel the need to bury you in a wall of text.

[enigma 521]

How much power can the ISD reroute to its weapons? Wookieepedia states that the ISD-II has an output of 9.28e24W.

 

 

 

Though I didn't want to partake in anymore SW vs. ST debates the one with Species 8472 just had to be responded to.

[Questor 501]

How much power can the ISD reroute to its weapons? Wookieepedia states that the ISD-II has an output of 9.28e24W.

 

 

 

Interesting...

 

 

 

Check the source, they won't accept it. Besides, my - Film Derived - Number is higher.

[Mith 0]

TRANSLATION: We should ignore everything not seen in the movies, because I don't like it

 

 

 

Surely not good sir.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For someone who claims to like the Zahn novels you seem to have no idea what they contain. A major plot point of the Hand of Thrawn duology, was the Imperial depopulation of Caamas, and the attempt to do the same thing to Bothawui with 3 cloaked ISDs.Complete destruction of life on an earthlike planet in less than 24 hours requires millions of gigatons at a minimum.

 

 

 

...Says who? I find this to be a rather curious statement. First, it is not required. You can assure death of all life on a planet with megatons of energy and some time to spare, especially with 24 hours. In fact, they fire pretty god-damn fast. Looking at Clone Wars, we see that their ships have a full auto capability. As in, they can fire about three pulses per second. That's pretty fast. Let's assume 1 megaton per pulse, just for kicks. Better yet, we'll only use the 8 large batteries on the ISDs. Now, assuming they can fire at the same rate (and there's no reason they can't--it'd be stupid not to be able to), a single barrel can fire about 180 pulses a minute and 10,800 pulses an hour. Within the alloted time frame, that's 259,200 pulses. Now, assuming we only have one barrel on each each gun firing (no big deal really), that's 2,073,600 shots. Now let's multiply that by three ISDs and we get 6,220,800 shots from the ISDs. Now, in reality it's going to be two barrels at least, but that's okay since the shots will probably land in a reasonable same area. So thus far, just looking at the main guns of the ship and not the many others, we get 12,411,600 megatons poured into the planet. That's a total of about 12.4 teratons spread over the planet. It's not even including bombardment craft or the like that may have assisted.

 

 

 

And chances are, the destruction, due to more guns, is going to do about six times as many shots as that. As in, over 40 million targets the ISDs can pin point and blast to hell with a single shot of their double barrel weapons. Look at this:

 

 

 

http://www.carloslabs.com/node/16

 

 

 

Pick your hometown and test out the 1.4 megaton nuke. Zoom out and look at how far the effects goes. Now imagine hundreds of thousands of them raining down upon the planet every five minutes. That's not even looking to other fighters and bombers that we know perform mop-up operations. For a quick and dirty DBZ, this would ensure that just about any planet you bombard will not have survivors with a properly planned bombardment.

 

 

 

Of course, even if we were to grant you these gigatons, you seem to be forgetting about the orginal BDZ; General Order 24. An order that a single Starship such as the Enterprise can carry out with an armament of about 100 photon torpedoes and her phaser banks. By your logic, the Enterprise 1701 has the firepower of roughly three ISDs.

 

 

 

 

 

Just one source from something you you profess to like. There is hardly "nothing" to support gigaton firepower, it just requires critical thinking or is in the level of canon you feel should be ignored unless directly referenced in the movies, or cartoon.

 

 

 

On the same token we should ignore the contradictory elements of ST canon, since they dont fit in with with the theme of the series. Things like weapons of mass destruction, which dont fit in with the peaceful, diplomatic, explorers of the UFP starting in the 24th century.

 

 

 

Is that why we've seen routinly that Starfleet is more than willing to drop that concept at the drop of the hat in face of destruction? Think about it. Kirk was willing to destroy himself and his ship in many scenarios to keep the Federation or even his crew alive. Picard even wrote off Troi's complaint that they didn't have the right to use a Borg teen as a weapon against the Borg. Sisko infected an entire Maquis colony to show his former head of security that he meant business. And Janeway...well, Janeway was willing to vaporize a building with her in it.

 

 

 

Your argument is stupid. We have multiple cases showing that the UFP will sink to low levels to get out alive if they have to. The very existence of Section 31 confirms that.

[Praeothmin 532]

Questor:

 

I am willing to use the asteroid vaping to calculate the power of an ISD's weapons.

 

Depending on scaling, it gives us low Kilotons to low Megatons (figures which I readily accept, and even accept the fact that they weren't firing full-strength).

 

These figures are comparable even to the "Pegasus" incident Warsies so like to use to claim weak fire power for ST ships and Photons torpedoes...

 

But, where I disagree, is that many shots did indeed come from the dorsal side of the ISD, where all the models and ICS indicate that only HTLs are present, so indeed the HTLs have fired in a quantifiable manner.

 

 

 

The issue I have with scaling down from the Superlaser is that the Superlaser and Turbolasers are two different weapons (their effects are different, their mechanism is different, and even the books say they are different.)

 

The DS book even states that the Alderaan explosion wasn't just the result of DET, but that a huge portion of the planet was "shunted" in Hyperspace.

 

This seems to indicate that the Superlaser, using some sort of... "NDF effect" ... opened up a rift in Hyperspace when it fired on Alderaan.

 

 

 

 

 

InvaderSkooj:

 

The same Thrawn books indicated that a fleet of 200 outdated Dreadnaughts were sufficient to significantly impact the war between Thrawn and the New Republic for whomever got it first.

 

In an Empire of millions of ships, that seems dumb, doesn't it?

 

 

 

And as for the bombardment of Caamas, three ISDs firing even low Megaton shots, say each firing once per second, for a full 24 hours, is more then enough to devastate a world (Mith is very generous in his assumptions, considering we've never seen the same ROF in ISDs as we saw in TCW ships).

 

If we only calculate 1 HTL at 1Mton per second, for three ships, in 24 hours more then 259 200Mtons are fired upon the surface of the world.

 

I'm pretty sure the MTLs and LTLs will also fire at least at 1 shot per second per ship, which adds significantly to the damage.

 

And what damage was that?

 

Well, according to Wookiepedia:

 

Caamas became a barren waste, and without vegetation to release oxygen, the atmosphere became toxic and unbreathable. Bombardment kicked up smoke and dust into the air, and the surface became wracked by dust storms and falling soot, eroding the surface and sending dirt and mud into the oceans. The waters, once teeming with sea life, became muddy, polluted, stagnant, and lifeless.

 

And we know ISDs usually act within a small fleet, so their Ties and the accompanying ships would take care of the "mop-up" operations...

 

No slagging, no atomized topsoil, no boiled off oceans...

 

 

 

3 GCS firing all their torpedoes, and then firing their Phasers once per second for 24 hours would obtain similar results...

 

 

 

[Questor 501]

Questor:

 

I am willing to use the asteroid vaping to calculate the power of an ISD's weapons.

 

Depending on scaling, it gives us low Kilotons to low Megatons (figures which I readily accept, and even accept the fact that they weren't firing full-strength).

 

These figures are comparable even to the "Pegasus" incident Warsies so like to use to claim weak fire power for ST ships and Photons torpedoes...

 

But, where I disagree, is that many shots did indeed come from the dorsal side of the ISD, where all the models and ICS indicate that only HTLs are present, so indeed the HTLs have fired in a quantifiable manner.

 

 

 

I assume that you are willing to back that statement up with numbers, analysis and evidence, right? Because I did.

 

 

 

Also, if you are going to cite Brian's site, be aware of what he actually calculated, and the many ways that his analysis was insanely conservative.

 

 

 

 

The issue I have with scaling down from the Superlaser is that the Superlaser and Turbolasers are two different weapons (their effects are different, their mechanism is different, and even the books say they are different.)

 

 

 

You'll note that in a previous post, I said much the same thing. But I am not comparing their power directly, I am assuming 100% efficiency and using that to generate a minimum power reactor output. I then scaled the reactor output to an ISD and used that output to calculate the amount of power available to each weapons mount. This generates a minimum.

 

 

 

 

The DS book even states that the Alderaan explosion wasn't just the result of DET, but that a huge portion of the planet was "shunted" in Hyperspace.

 

This seems to indicate that the Superlaser, using some sort of... "NDF effect" ... opened up a rift in Hyperspace when it fired on Alderaan.

 

 

 

 

So you can bring in badly written EU sources, but people who support Wars can't?

 

 

 

Fine, we'll move from gravitational binding force calcs to velocity calcs, which EASILY survive your argument. You know that pops my numbers up about 7 orders of magnitude, right?

 

 

 

And we haven't even dealt with the planetary shield, So those numbers are minimums as well.

[InvaderSkooj 1]

Surely not good sir.

TRANSLATION: TCW overrides EU

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

...Says who? I find this to be a rather curious statement. First, it is not required. You can assure death of all life on a planet with megatons of energy and some time to spare, especially with 24 hours. In fact, they fire pretty god-damn fast. Looking at Clone Wars, we see that their ships have a full auto capability. As in, they can fire about three pulses per second. That's pretty fast. Let's assume 1 megaton per pulse, just for kicks. Better yet, we'll only use the 8 large batteries on the ISDs. Now, assuming they can fire at the same rate (and there's no reason they can't--it'd be stupid not to be able to), a single barrel can fire about 180 pulses a minute and 10,800 pulses an hour. Within the alloted time frame, that's 259,200 pulses. Now, assuming we only have one barrel on each each gun firing (no big deal really), that's 2,073,600 shots. Now let's multiply that by three ISDs and we get 6,220,800 shots from the ISDs. Now, in reality it's going to be two barrels at least, but that's okay since the shots will probably land in a reasonable same area. So thus far, just looking at the main guns of the ship and not the many others, we get 12,411,600 megatons poured into the planet. That's a total of about 12.4 teratons spread over the planet. It's not even including bombardment craft or the like that may have assisted

 

And chances are, the destruction, due to more guns, is going to do about six times as many shots as that. As in, over 40 million targets the ISDs can pin point and blast to hell with a single shot of their double barrel weapons. Look at this:.

Still not enough to wipe out all life in the space of a day. While a higher rate of fire and more guns lowers the individual yield per shot it does not lower the overall energy requirement, The asteroid that wiped out the dinosaurs was 100 teratons all at once and it didn't wipe out all life on the planet since I'm sitting here typing

 

 

 

 

 

Pick your hometown and test out the 1.4 megaton nuke. Zoom out and look at how far the effects goes. Now imagine hundreds of thousands of them raining down upon the planet every five minutes. That's not even looking to other fighters and bombers that we know perform mop-up operations. For a quick and dirty DBZ, this would ensure that just about any planet you bombard will not have survivors with a properly planned bombardment.

Evidence? the dinosaur killer left survivors, Caamas didn't even have plants left

 

 

 

Of course, even if we were to grant you these gigatons, you seem to be forgetting about the orginal BDZ; General Order 24. An order that a single Starship such as the Enterprise can carry out with an armament of about 100 photon torpedoes and her phaser banks. By your logic, the Enterprise 1701 has the firepower of roughly three ISDs.

And just where does it say GO24 was the extermination of ALL LIFE on a planet?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Is that why we've seen routinly that Starfleet is more than willing to drop that concept at the drop of the hat in face of destruction? Think about it. Kirk was willing to destroy himself and his ship in many scenarios to keep the Federation or even his crew alive. Picard even wrote off Troi's complaint that they didn't have the right to use a Borg teen as a weapon against the Borg. Sisko infected an entire Maquis colony to show his former head of security that he meant business. And Janeway...well, Janeway was willing to vaporize a building with her in it.

 

 

 

Your argument is stupid. We have multiple cases showing that the UFP will sink to low levels to get out alive if they have to. The very existence of Section 31 confirms that.

 

Yet Cardassia only had 800 million dead, the breen attack on earth caused less damage than a 1,000 bomber raid in WWII

[InvaderSkooj 1]

.

 

 

 

 

 

InvaderSkooj:

 

The same Thrawn books indicated that a fleet of 200 outdated Dreadnaughts were sufficient to significantly impact the war between Thrawn and the New Republic for whomever got it first.

 

In an Empire of millions of ships, that seems dumb, doesn't it?

Nope that was the Thrawn Trilogy, nice red herring by the way

 

 

 

And as for the bombardment of Caamas, three ISDs firing even low Megaton shots, say each firing once per second, for a full 24 hours, is more then enough to devastate a world (Mith is very generous in his assumptions, considering we've never seen the same ROF in ISDs as we saw in TCW ships).

 

If we only calculate 1 HTL at 1Mton per second, for three ships, in 24 hours more then 259 200Mtons are fired upon the surface of the world.

 

I'm pretty sure the MTLs and LTLs will also fire at least at 1 shot per second per ship, which adds significantly to the damage.

 

And what damage was that?

While that would cause widespread planetary scale damage, it still wouldn't cause the extinction of all life. For 3 star destroyers just to get to dino-killer level in 24hrs requires 385 megatons/ second

 

 

 

 

 

Well, according to Wookiepedia:

 

 

 

And we know ISDs usually act within a small fleet, so their Ties and the accompanying ships would take care of the "mop-up" operations...

 

No slagging, no atomized topsoil, no boiled off oceans...

 

 

 

3 GCS firing all their torpedoes, and then firing their Phasers once per second for 24 hours would obtain similar results...

 

 

 

 

And given how they have trouble with very large rocks if they can do such a feat it wouldn't be through DET. And I wouldnt count on it, The Dominion had trouble doing that to Cardassia with hundreds or thousands of ships, and the breen attack on Earth was also unimpressive.

[InvaderSkooj 1]

My interpretation doesn't even require TLs to be gigaton weapons. 1 petaton(a million gigatons) is 4.184e24J/ 3 ISDs/ 24 hrs/ 3600s/ 100TLs average 38.5 megatons per shot. At 4 shots a second we're down to 9.65 megatons a shot

[Questor 501]

My interpretation doesn't even require TLs to be gigaton weapons. 1 petaton(a million gigatons) is 4.184e24J/ 3 ISDs/ 24 hrs/ 3600s/ 100TLs average 38.5 megatons per shot. At 4 shots a second we're down to 9.65 megatons a shot

 

 

 

What happens when you plug in 3.472e22J/sec into that?