Are ST ships as badly designed as SW ships?

[Praeothmin 532]

Every time I hear a Warsie state how poorly designed ST ships are (Bridge on top of Saucer section, big Warp Nacelles), I remind myself that at least, while ST bridges are on top of the saucer, they don't protrude like SW bridges do, and the shield generators aren't so easily destroyed.

 

And we have never, ever, seen a shield generator protecting a landing bay being located on the hull, in an easily shootable location.

 

 

 

Warp Nacelles make tempting targets?

 

So, what about those big ass Ion engines at the back, in a poorly protected angle since they have no guns able to shoot that way?

 

Plus Warp Nacelles are lean, and the pylons are even leaner, and seem very sturdy.

 

And at least ST ships have guns and torpedo launchers that can shoot at their back, SW Capships don't...

 

 

 

Or what about that big power core protruding from the ventral side?

 

At least Warp Cores are inside the ship, fully enclosed and protected...

 

 

 

See, our shuttle bays also have doors that close, so even once the shields are down, enemies still cannot shoot inside without first shooting the doors.

 

 

 

So, once again I find myself thinking that ST are not that poorly designed, and are even more aestethic then SW ships while offering at the very least equal protection...

[enigma 521]

ISD launch bays do have doors and weapons to protect it.

 

 

 

As for their shield generators\projectors, I do not know much other than you'd have to drop the shields in order to get at them. Then again same thing can be said about Trek ships. Though they do not protrude as much but it is there.

 

 

 

Engines and power core on an ISD are heavily armoured and shielded where as the nacelles on a ST ship are supported by spindly pylons (with the exception of the Defiant class. At least they did good there.) The placement of those nacelles can be compared to having the tires on your car being placed three feet away from the main body of the car.

 

 

 

The bridge In the ISD tower is a speck compared to the bull's eye that Trek ships have. I may be wrong but didn't the top of the E-D's bridge have a see through glass type dome?

 

 

 

Also the necks of many Trek ships are huge weak points.

 

 

 

 

 

There are more weak points on a Trek ship than on an ISD. But I am not saying that all SW ships are not badly designed for example the Nebulon B frigate has a huge weak point being the neck.

 

 

 

I just take issue in you considering SDs being badly designed when you could have chosen better. The problem with Trek ships is that the weak points are pretty much the same for many ship classes. There are some exceptions like the Defiant class and the Nebula class. The defiant is small and has their propulsion systems all built in and it is small enough to not need a saucer section and a stardrive section. Nebulas are better designed than the Galaxy Class since they are more compact and hull hugging.

 

 

 

 

 

Overall, SW ships do have some bad designs but there are so many different types, shapes and sizes that not all are going to be good. But for Trek ships, many weak points on one ship type is prevalent in many others. UFP have commons weak points and so do the Cardassians and Klingons and Romulans, Vulcans (ENT era) and so forth. Borg ships I think are better designed that most Trek powers even though their designs could be improved like make them more compact and eliminate wasted space. If the drones can function in space then why need life support systems?

[Khas 12,158]

The drones need energy to be sent to them so their implants could produce the organic chemicals needed to survive. Also, assimilations are carried out on cubes, so they'd need life-support for the not-yet assimilated.

[enigma 521]

The drones need energy to be sent to them so their implants could produce the organic chemicals needed to survive. Also, assimilations are carried out on cubes, so they'd need life-support for the not-yet assimilated.

 

 

 

Forgot about that. But they do have a lot of wasted space.

[Praeothmin 532]

ISD launch bays do have doors and weapons to protect it.

 

 

 

Never saw any mention of doors, even in novels.

 

Does the ICS mention them?

 

 

 

 

 

As for their shield generators\projectors, I do not know much other than you'd have to drop the shields in order to get at them. Then again same thing can be said about Trek ships. Though they do not protrude as much but it is there.

 

 

 

Well, no, that's the issue.

 

ST shield generators are part of the hull, they don't protrude and do not make big ass targets that you can shoot at...

 

And as we've seen many times in SW, their shields, just like ST's, have multiple arcs and one portion can be dropped while others stay up, and if you shoot a portion with enough power, you can drop it in one hit...

 

 

 

 

 

Engines and power core on an ISD are heavily armoured and shielded where as the nacelles on a ST ship are supported by spindly pylons (with the exception of the Defiant class. At least they did good there.) The placement of those nacelles can be compared to having the tires on your car being placed three feet away from the main body of the car.

 

 

 

Hhmm, see, Nacelles are also shielded and armored.

 

In ST2, the E-Nil needed to fire on an unshielded Reliant to take out a Nacelle.

 

Also, they are not such easy targets as you would have us believe, because we don't see them being targetted that much in all the DS9 battles.

 

In Generations, an unshielded E-D took direct hits to a Nacelle, and it did not blow up, nor did it cause cascading failures around the ship.

 

In fact, it took less damage then the unshielded hull portions that were hit...

 

And think of this:

 

You destroy a Nacelle, you cripple its ship since it cannot go to Warp anymore, but it can still fight, has SL engines that still work, and a Warp Drive that can still power the ship.

 

You destroy the dome on the underside of an ISD, and BOOM... No more ISD...

 

Guess which one I'd prefer having...

 

 

 

 

 

The bridge In the ISD tower is a speck compared to the bull's eye that Trek ships have. I may be wrong but didn't the top of the E-D's bridge have a see through glass type dome?

 

 

 

Really?

 

What's harder to aim at?

 

A small room, barely 10 meters accross, barely protruding from the slightly curved surface of a ship with a saucer section 150 meters accross, or a big room full of windows, about 15 to 20 meters accross, sitting directly in front of you on that big ass tower you can plainly see, which is right in front of your face?

 

 

 

 

 

Also the necks of many Trek ships are huge weak points.

 

 

 

 

Again, not as much as you'd like us to believe.

 

Look at ST2, direct hits to the neck section where the torpedo launchers were.

 

Did you see a severed neck?

 

Nope.

 

ST: Gen, direct hits to the back of the unshielded E-D neck section.

 

Again, did we see a severed neck?

 

Nope.

 

Why?

 

Logical explanation is that these areas, since the Feds know they would be weak points, are more heavily armored and structurally sounder then any other parts of the ship.

 

I do agree a ship without the neck section would probably be sounder structurally, but what I'm saying is that they're not the incredible weakness most people think they are.

 

Nevertheless, they did get rid of them on the more recent models (Sovereign, Akira, Prometheus, Intrepid, Norway, Saber, etc...).

 

 

 

 

 

There are more weak points on a Trek ship than on an ISD. But I am not saying that all SW ships are not badly designed for example the Nebulon B frigate has a huge weak point being the neck.

 

 

 

Don't agree, as I've explained above...

 

 

 

 

 

I just take issue in you considering SDs being badly designed when you could have chosen better. The problem with Trek ships is that the weak points are pretty much the same for many ship classes. There are some exceptions like the Defiant class and the Nebula class. The defiant is small and has their propulsion systems all built in and it is small enough to not need a saucer section and a stardrive section. Nebulas are better designed than the Galaxy Class since they are more compact and hull hugging.

 

 

 

Well, see, the problem is that SW ships also share the same design flaws:

 

ISD, SSD, Venator-class, Acclamator, Victory, the Trade Federation Cruiser, etc...

 

 

 

 

 

SW ships do have some bad designs but there are so many different types, shapes and sizes that not all are going to be good. But for Trek ships, many weak points on one ship type is prevalent in many others. UFP have commons weak points

 

 

 

Same with SW Capital ships, as explained above...

 

 

 

 

 

and so do the Cardassians and Klingons and Romulans, Vulcans (ENT era) and so forth

 

 

 

While I agree that the Klingons and Romulans share the same design flaws as the Federation, the Cardassian ships are much more like the Defiant, and the early Vulcan ships were also less vulnerable then the NX, for example...

[InvaderSkooj 1]

Yup just as bad if not worse. At least SW ships arent filled with antimatter, and tubes full of liquid hot magma...err plasma.

 

And most likely most the older types would collapse under their own weight without mass lightening and structural integrity fields.

 

The mighty defiant has no rear facing weapons, and we don't really know if star destroyers have rear facing weapons or not.

 

The Kzinti lesson teaches us that being in the general vicinity of exhaust is a bad idea, and the sensor globes were already unshielded when the fighters shot at them

[Khas 12,158]

Yup just as bad if not worse. At least SW ships arent filled with antimatter, and tubes full of liquid hot magma...err plasma.

 

And most likely most the older types would collapse under their own weight without mass lightening and structural integrity fields.

 

The mighty defiant has no rear facing weapons, and we don't really know if star destroyers have rear facing weapons or not.

 

The Kzinti lesson teaches us that being in the general vicinity of exhaust is a bad idea, and the sensor globes were already unshielded when the fighters shot at them

 

 

 

Except that the Defiant was shown with a rear torpedo launcher in "Paradise Lost". And about the sensor domes being unshielded, how come the Imperial officer said "Sir, we've lost our bridge deflector shield!" to Admiral Piet when they were destroyed?

[Khas 12,158]

RayCav has a point though. It's just a show, we should really just relax. For Mystery ASVS Theater 3000!

[Jason 27]

In anycase the star destroyer lot worst starship either universe. It a warship to big for own good. Any enemy just need keep it distance and weapon hit at that range to beat it no sensor need. You just look window to hit it and stay it ranges. It just that big starships.

 

As for UFP starship only main weakness big warp drives. It interest question none major power spacecraft just stay in that Star system and armed with photon torpedoes phasers. For that matter saucer section the Galaxy class starship best Star Trek battleship ever.

[Khas 12,158]

For that matter saucer section the Galaxy class starship best Star Trek battleship ever.

 

 

 

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

 

You're joking, right?

[enigma 521]

Never saw any mention of doors, even in novels.

 

Does the ICS mention them?

 

 

 

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Imperial_I-class_Star_Destroyer

 

 

 

There's a pic of the hangar of an ISD being closed. The reason I think you see them a lot of the time with the bays open because of the fighters they deploy for patrol. Every so often they'd rotate patrol shifts.

 

 

 

The site also states that it has armoured doors.

 

 

 

 

 

Well, no, that's the issue.

 

ST shield generators are part of the hull, they don't protrude and do not make big ass targets that you can shoot at...

 

And as we've seen many times in SW, their shields, just like ST's, have multiple arcs and one portion can be dropped while others stay up, and if you shoot a portion with enough power, you can drop it in one hit...

 

 

 

Apparently the ICS states that the shield projectors are located under the hull armour and the generators are near the reactor. The ones on the tower (apparently still debated) are local area effect)

 

 

 

 

 

Hhmm, see, Nacelles are also shielded and armored.

 

In ST2, the E-Nil needed to fire on an unshielded Reliant to take out a Nacelle.

 

Also, they are not such easy targets as you would have us believe, because we don't see them being targeted that much in all the DS9 battles.

 

In Generations, an unshielded E-D took direct hits to a Nacelle, and it did not blow up, nor did it cause cascading failures around the ship.

 

In fact, it took less damage then the unshielded hull portions that were hit...

 

And think of this:

 

You destroy a Nacelle, you cripple its ship since it cannot go to Warp anymore, but it can still fight, has SL engines that still work, and a Warp Drive that can still power the ship.

 

You destroy the dome on the underside of an ISD, and BOOM... No more ISD...

 

Guess which one I'd prefer having...

 

 

 

Just to let you know, UFP ships for the most part have no armour. Especially the E-D.

 

 

 

There's that TNG ep when the E-D got hit on the nacelle causing it to vent plasma and made the ship go kablooie. But then it reset itself and got destroyed again and again before being rectified.

 

 

 

I prefer a ship that generate over 9 x 10*24 Watts of power that can be used on both offensive and defensive systems than a ST ship.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Really?

 

What's harder to aim at?

 

A small room, barely 10 meters accross, barely protruding from the slightly curved surface of a ship with a saucer section 150 meters accross, or a big room full of windows, about 15 to 20 meters accross, sitting directly in front of you on that big ass tower you can plainly see, which is right in front of your face?

 

 

 

Yeah a starship with a bridge right on top and center of the saucer section is better defended. Lol! that is funny.

 

 

 

 

 

Again, not as much as you'd like us to believe.

 

Look at ST2, direct hits to the neck section where the torpedo launchers were.

 

Did you see a severed neck?

 

Nope.

 

ST: Gen, direct hits to the back of the unshielded E-D neck section.

 

Again, did we see a severed neck?

 

Nope.

 

Why?

 

Logical explanation is that these areas, since the Feds know they would be weak points, are more heavily armored and structurally sounder then any other parts of the ship.

 

I do agree a ship without the neck section would probably be sounder structurally, but what I'm saying is that they're not the incredible weakness most people think they are.

 

Nevertheless, they did get rid of them on the more recent models (Sovereign, Akira, Prometheus, Intrepid, Norway, Saber, etc...).

 

 

 

There is no fucking armour! They made a big deal with the Defiant with it's ablative armour! Most UFP ships just have hull plating.

 

 

 

Why did they get rid of it unless they figure it to be a weak spot?

 

 

 

 

 

While I agree that the Klingons and Romulans share the same design flaws as the Federation, the Cardassian ships are much more like the Defiant, and the early Vulcan ships were also less vulnerable then the NX, for example...

 

 

 

The fucking ring on the Vulcan ships are huge weak points. Durrrr.

 

 

 

The Cardies also are retarded by having their main weapon centered in one spot.

 

take that out and they are largely useless.

 

 

 

You have got to be deluding yourself thinking that Trek ships are less badly designed than the SDs when you could have done a better job and chose actual badly designed SW ships.

[Praeothmin 532]

Yup just as bad if not worse. At least SW ships arent filled with antimatter, and tubes full of liquid hot magma...err plasma.

 

And most likely most the older types would collapse under their own weight without mass lightening and structural integrity fields.

 

The mighty defiant has no rear facing weapons, and we don't really know if star destroyers have rear facing weapons or not.

 

The Kzinti lesson teaches us that being in the general vicinity of exhaust is a bad idea, and the sensor globes were already unshielded when the fighters shot at them

 

 

 

Hhhmm, funny has how there is no mass lightening at sublight speeds and the old ships seem to hold up just fine.

 

Funny how a BoP and Voyager can land on a planet and not collapse, despite their obvious frailties...

 

 

 

And the ISD is filled with Hypermatter, which doesn't seem more stable then AM...

 

 

 

And yes, the Defiant has both a Torpedo launcher and a Phaser array facing aft, we've seen them both fire in DS9...

 

 

 

As for the ISDs, I have seen no aft-facing weapons on the original ICS image, and besides, its very own structure makes it quite improbable, as its wedge shape and big ass tower means most weapons on the hull would not even be able to target anything behind it...

 

You don't need to be in the wake of a ship to be behind it and out of its firing arc...

 

 

 

As for the Globes, where is it mentioned they were unshielded?

 

The correct sequence of action is:

 

A-Wing comes in, shoots the globes, then someone on SSD shouts "We've lost bridge deflectors"...

 

Is it mentioned in the novelization?

 

Because in the movie, it is implied that destroying these globes brought the shields down...

[Praeothmin 532]

http://starwars.wiki..._Star_Destroyer

 

 

 

There's a pic of the hangar of an ISD being closed. The reason I think you see them a lot of the time with the bays open because of the fighters they deploy for patrol. Every so often they'd rotate patrol shifts.

 

 

 

The site also states that it has armoured doors.

 

 

 

Ah, thanks, didn't know they had doors, as even in TESB, I seem to remember the hangars being opened...

 

 

 

 

 

Apparently the ICS states that the shield projectors are located under the hull armour and the generators are near the reactor. The ones on the tower (apparently still debated) are local area effect)

 

 

 

Yes, they are the bridge shield generators, and I would have think that one would not put his bridge shield generators in a location so easily targettable, in order to ensure that my bridge crew survives the entire fight...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just to let you know, UFP ships for the most part have no armour. Especially the E-D.

 

 

 

You can call it armor, you can call it hull, the fact of the matter is the ships are not paper thin as you would have them, and have been shown at least as resistant as SW ship hulls...

 

 

 

 

 

There's that TNG ep when the E-D got hit on the nacelle causing it to vent plasma and made the ship go kablooie. But then it reset itself and got destroyed again and again before being rectified.

 

 

 

Yup, this is when the E-D still suffered from the "Sneeze and the core goes boom" issues...

 

But then, you have the same E-D taking a direct hit while unshielded, and no BOOM...

 

You've got the E-E taking hit on a Nacelle, and no BOOM...

 

Voyager took hit on Nacelles, and no BOOM...

 

You've got 1 example to my three...

 

 

 

 

 

I prefer a ship that generate over 9 x 10*24 Watts of power that can be used on both offensive and defensive systems than a ST ship.

 

 

 

 

If it ever is able to generate that, then I'll agree, except we've never seen that kind of power in any such systems (loses tower to low kinetic impactor where such powerful shields would still have been there)...

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah a starship with a bridge right on top and center of the saucer section is better defended. Lol! that is funny.

 

 

 

 

And here we see how Warsies bend over backwards trying to defend their beloved ISDs...

 

Tell me again how a bridge located on an upright, easily targettable tower, is better then a bridge on the top decks of a slightly curved flat surface sauver, that offers a more difficult area to target then a big ass tower?

 

That is funny...

 

 

 

 

 

There is no fucking armour! They made a big deal with the Defiant with it's ablative armour! Most UFP ships just have hull plating.

 

 

 

 

You are right, they don't call it "armor", it's simply "hull-plating".

 

It still is as sturdy as SW ship hulls though...

 

 

 

 

 

Why did they get rid of it unless they figure it to be a weak spot?

 

 

 

Did you not read what I wrote (bold part mine)?

 

Logical explanation is that these areas, since the Feds know they would be weak points, are more heavily armored and structurally sounder then any other parts of the ship.

 

I do agree a ship without the neck section would probably be sounder structurally, but what I'm saying is that they're not the incredible weakness most people think they are.

 

Nevertheless, they did get rid of them on the more recent models (Sovereign, Akira, Prometheus, Intrepid, Norway, Saber, etc...).

 

I said they were weaker then ships with no necks, but not as weak as Warsies would like them to be.

 

At least, ST got rid of their neck sections, while SW still has its dumb bridge towers...

 

 

 

 

 

The fucking ring on the Vulcan ships are huge weak points. Durrrr.

 

 

 

And how easily can you target them?

 

And again, Warp Nacelles are not as weak as you'd like them to be...

 

 

 

 

 

The Cardies also are retarded by having their main weapon centered in one spot.

 

take that out and they are largely useless.

 

 

 

I agree on that point, but how often did you see that happen?

 

Not very often now did you?

 

It must be harder then you think...

 

 

 

You have got to be deluding yourself thinking that Trek ships are less badly designed than the SDs when you could have done a better job and chose actual badly designed SW ships.

 

 

 

Whatever helps you sleep at night...

 

 

 

I never said ST ships were well designed, I just said I felt they were not worse then SW ships, and were even a bit better designed.

 

But if someone were to say:

 

"They're both badly designed!", I'd have to agree with them...

[InvaderSkooj 1]

Hhhmm, funny has how there is no mass lightening at sublight speeds and the old ships seem to hold up just fine.

Yup thats why they apparently leave the warp field on at all times TNG+

 

Funny how a BoP and Voyager can land on a planet and not collapse, despite their obvious frailties...

Note how a said some not all

 

 

 

And the ISD is filled with Hypermatter, which doesn't seem more stable then AM...

Yet for a prototype reactor in an ISD II we haven't anything with a hypermatter reactor spontaneously explode, case in point one of the new episodes of TCW features a venator crashing into a planet at a significant velocity, yet no earth shattering kaboom for the hypermatter reactor

 

 

 

And yes, the Defiant has both a Torpedo launcher and a Phaser array facing aft, we've seen them both fire in DS9...

 

 

 

As for the ISDs, I have seen no aft-facing weapons on the original ICS image, and besides, its very own structure makes it quite improbable, as its wedge shape and big ass tower means most weapons on the hull would not even be able to target anything behind it...

 

You don't need to be in the wake of a ship to be behind it and out of its firing arc...

Missed that episode, and on the same token we've never seen a SD attacked from the rear

 

 

 

As for the Globes, where is it mentioned they were unshielded?

 

The correct sequence of action is:

 

A-Wing comes in, shoots the globes, then someone on SSD shouts "We've lost bridge deflectors"...

 

Is it mentioned in the novelization?

 

Because in the movie, it is implied that destroying these globes brought the shields down...

 

On the bridge only, and this was after Ackbar gave the order to concentrate fire on the Executor.

 

So at best the globes only provide local coverage for the bridge, and the shields were already weakened by who knows how much fire from the Rebel Fleet.

[Praeothmin 532]

Yup thats why they apparently leave the warp field on at all times TNG+

 

 

 

And where did you get that info?

 

I've never heard any mention of this...

 

 

 

 

 

Note how a said some not all

 

 

 

For which you provided no example of, while I counteracted with examples...

 

 

 

 

 

Yet for a prototype reactor in an ISD II we haven't anything with a hypermatter reactor spontaneously explode, case in point one of the new episodes of TCW features a venator crashing into a planet at a significant velocity, yet no earth shattering kaboom for the hypermatter reactor

 

 

 

We pretty much all agree that the E-D early on had this "sneeze-to-close-to-the-Warp-Core-and-it-explodes" issue, but it was solved later, and not all ships have this issue.

 

Notice how a Dominion ship crash-landed and embedded itself intact in a rock face, and no BOOM.

 

Same thing when Voyager crashed on the ice planet, or when the BoP crashed under the Golden Gate Bridge in SF in ST IV.

 

And at the speed it was going, water's about as hard as ciment (yeah, slightly exagerating, but you get the picture)...

 

 

 

 

 

Missed that episode, and on the same token we've never seen a SD attacked from the rear

 

 

 

And still no ICS picture or any model indicates any guns facing aft.

 

Although it doesn't really matter, since even if they had guns facing aft, their sensors apparently can't detect anything behind those towers (MF latching on in TESB)...

 

 

 

 

 

On the bridge only, and this was after Ackbar gave the order to concentrate fire on the Executor.

 

So at best the globes only provide local coverage for the bridge, and the shields were already weakened by who knows how much fire from the Rebel Fleet.

 

 

 

I have no problems with that line of thought.

 

This still doesn't excuse the poor placement of these globes at the top of the tower, nor does it render them hard to target...

 

Which is my point from the beginning: They make easy targets...

[InvaderSkooj 1]

And where did you get that info?

 

I've never heard any mention of this...

DejaQ they extend a warp field around a small moon/big asteroid and tow it away from a planet at impulse with tractor beams. Last I checked the blue lights were part of the warp coils thus if the blue lights on = warp field

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For which you provided no example of, while I counteracted with examples...

None of the UFP Enterprises were capable of planetary landing

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

We pretty much all agree that the E-D early on had this "sneeze-to-close-to-the-Warp-Core-and-it-explodes" issue, but it was solved later, and not all ships have this issue.

 

Notice how a Dominion ship crash-landed and embedded itself intact in a rock face, and no BOOM.

 

Same thing when Voyager crashed on the ice planet, or when the BoP crashed under the Golden Gate Bridge in SF in ST IV.

 

And at the speed it was going, water's about as hard as ciment (yeah, slightly exagerating, but you get the picture)...

Yet every other ship without a good guy main character onboard just explodes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And still no ICS picture or any model indicates any guns facing aft.

 

Although it doesn't really matter, since even if they had guns facing aft, their sensors apparently can't detect anything behind those towers (MF latching on in TESB)...

ICS cutaways of SDs were all 3/4 views from the front. Considering the sensor globe had no line of sight when the MF landed its not being detected is not unsurprising

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Which is my point from the beginning: They make easy targets...

 

So easy they needed to concentrate the fire power of a fleet on them,and they only knocked out the shields on the bridge

[Praeothmin 532]

DejaQ they extend a warp field around a small moon/big asteroid and tow it away from a planet at impulse with tractor beams. Last I checked the blue lights were part of the warp coils thus if the blue lights on = warp field

 

 

 

And as was mentioned in another thread where this was brought up, they mentioned how it was something special that didn't happen everyday.

 

My DVD player can be powered up and not play DVDs.

 

A car can have it's engine powered up, but not run, even while every other system is working, and if you had en electric motor on that same car, you could have both engines turned on while only one is serving for the car's propulsion...

 

Who says the Warp Coils can be powered down when the Core is active?

 

This only proves that they can extend a Warp field around an object (something that was shown before and after anyways), not that they always use Warp Fields when at impulse...

 

 

 

 

 

None of the UFP Enterprises were capable of planetary landing

 

 

 

But the E-Nil did go through Earth's atmosphere once or twice without collapsing under its weight.

 

And even modern structures, had they been made using techniques from the beginning of the last century, would have either been impossible to buid, or would have collapsed on themselves.

 

This still doesn't prove your assertion that they would collapse under their own weight...

 

 

 

 

 

Yet every other ship without a good guy main character onboard just explodes

 

 

 

I have to admit I haven't seen many ships crash without main characters on it, so could you show me such an example?

 

Oh, and by the way, the Dominion ship had no major character on it...

 

 

 

 

 

ICS cutaways of SDs were all 3/4 views from the front. Considering the sensor globe had no line of sight when the MF landed its not being detected is not unsurprising

 

 

 

Which is the dumbest part of this scene.

 

The MF came right at the bridge, then had to loop over the tower and go to the back of the ship and then latch onto it.

 

It should have been visible at least up until it went right behind the tower.

 

This shows us that those sensor domes can't see shit behind the tower, that an ISD has no sensor behind the tower, and that an ISD doesn't even have sensors that can tell it when something large and metallic is attached to its own hull...

 

So why should we believe they have guns that cover aft when they can't see shit back there...

 

 

 

 

 

So easy they needed to concentrate the fire power of a fleet on them,and they only knocked out the shields on the bridge

 

 

 

 

Remember, we are talking about SW targetting here, which you yourself had to admit in the thread talking about targetting that SW relied on saturation fire to hit a target, so to the SW gunners, you are right, they may be hard to hit, but we are comparing the two universes together here, so those domes, when facing a Federation who'se ships can target specific ship systems, will be like large painted targets...

[InvaderSkooj 1]

And as was mentioned in another thread where this was brought up, they mentioned how it was something special that didn't happen everyday.

 

My DVD player can be powered up and not play DVDs.

 

A car can have it's engine powered up, but not run, even while every other system is working, and if you had en electric motor on that same car, you could have both engines turned on while only one is serving for the car's propulsion...

 

Who says the Warp Coils can be powered down when the Core is active?

 

This only proves that they can extend a Warp field around an object (something that was shown before and after anyways), not that they always use Warp Fields when at impulse...

Ahh but it nicely explains the lack of mass destruction while propelling multi-hundred thousand ton ships in atmosphere with fusion rockets, and the lack of kinetic effects in voyagers crash

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But the E-Nil did go through Earth's atmosphere once or twice without collapsing under its weight.

 

And even modern structures, had they been made using techniques from the beginning of the last century, would have either been impossible to buid, or would have collapsed on themselves.

 

This still doesn't prove your assertion that they would collapse under their own weight...

Which is easily explained if they have their mass lightening on, be much different if we seen them survive in a deep in a gravity well with no impulse/warp power, or SIFs on

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I have to admit I haven't seen many ships crash without main characters on it, so could you show me such an example?

 

Oh, and by the way, the Dominion ship had no major character on it...

Every nameless miranda ever destroyed, USS Yamato blowing up, Odyssey blowing up after being rammed by a bug,various klingon ships being blown up after ramming by bug, Ent-D various near breaches or breaches in alternate timelines,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Which is the dumbest part of this scene.

 

The MF came right at the bridge, then had to loop over the tower and go to the back of the ship and then latch onto it.

 

It should have been visible at least up until it went right behind the tower.

 

This shows us that those sensor domes can't see shit behind the tower, that an ISD has no sensor behind the tower, and that an ISD doesn't even have sensors that can tell it when something large and metallic is attached to its own hull...

 

So why should we believe they have guns that cover aft when they can't see shit back there...

Doesn't change line of sight, the MF merely flew out of line of sight,which will be more limited closer to the sensor. Given how the Rebels detected the Imperial fleet behind them, and the blockade runner was able to fire on a ISD behind it we know rearward facing sensors and weapons are not unheard of in SW

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Remember, we are talking about SW targetting here, which you yourself had to admit in the thread talking about targetting that SW relied on saturation fire to hit a target, so to the SW gunners, you are right, they may be hard to hit, but we are comparing the two universes together here, so those domes, when facing a Federation who'se ships can target specific ship systems, will be like large painted targets...

 

Which for all we know took a whole fleets firepower to weaken

[Praeothmin 532]

Ahh but it nicely explains the lack of mass destruction while propelling multi-hundred thousand ton ships in atmosphere with fusion rockets,

 

 

 

 

What mass destruction?

 

If the ships are in controlled flights in the atmosphere, how would that result in mass destruction?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

and the lack of kinetic effects in voyagers crash

 

 

 

You mean the same lack of mass destruction caused by the Invisible Hand's crash landing?

 

Because apart for some crushed landing strip, there doesn't seem to be any earth-shattering tremors or anything like it when it crashes.

 

Are you going to tell me SW ships also have mass lighetning now?

 

And the E-D's saucer crash had no Warp Core, no Nacelles, no Impulse engines to rely on, on thrusters, so no mass lightening.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Which is easily explained if they have their mass lightening on, be much different if we seen them survive in a deep in a gravity well with no impulse/warp power, or SIFs on

 

 

 

 

Their SIFs seem pretty strong from what we've seen, so they and the ship's structural strienght could be the only thing holding the ship together in an atmosphere...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Every nameless miranda ever destroyed, USS Yamato blowing up, Odyssey blowing up after being rammed by a bug,various klingon ships being blown up after ramming by bug, Ent-D various near breaches or breaches in alternate timelines,

 

 

 

 

These aren't crashes you're mentioning, but only ships that were fired upon and then blew up.

 

The Odissey isn't even a good example, because it was hit many times while unshielded (weapons went right through the shields, like in Gen), before it got rammed by the bug.

 

And even then, it did not immediately explode.

 

The bug rammed it, exploded upon impact, and then, the Odissey went boom...

 

 

 

 

 

Doesn't change line of sight, the MF merely flew out of line of sight,which will be more limited closer to the sensor. Given how the Rebels detected the Imperial fleet behind them, and the blockade runner was able to fire on a ISD behind it we know rearward facing sensors and weapons are not unheard of in SW

 

 

 

They are certainly not unheard off, but they are shitty at best, since an ISD with these huge frigging Sensor Domes/Shield Generators lost the MF once it got close to the tower...

 

The Tantive IV was firing at a ship a few km behind it, not really close, and the Rebel fleet, in case your memory of the movie is sketchy, detected the Imperial fleet once it borke off its attack on the DS, when they turned right towards the Imp fleet.

 

They did not, at any time, detect them behind them...

 

Although it could be (and I wouldn't argue this) that the reason they didn't detect them was because of the jamming coming from the DS...

 

 

 

 

 

Which for all we know took a whole fleets firepower to weaken

 

 

 

Except these shields dropped down pretty quickly once the order was given, and even if it did take the whole fleet's firepower to destroy them, we're talking about an SSD for crying out loud.

 

Of course it will take a lot more to destroy their shields then on an ISD...

 

 

 

The globes on an ISD are still a very visible target which allows one to take out Shields and Sensors, and will be destroyed a lot easier then an SSD's...

[Crayz9000 0]

Oh for the love of Q...

 

 

 

 

 

RE: the domes on top of the bridge

 

 

 

Going temporarily OOC, if you look at the bridge of any modern naval warship, you'll see big geodesic domes. Those are radar domes. Now, that was the design influence of the Star Destroyer bridge, which is why they were intended to be sensor domes.

 

 

 

The reason that someone shouts that the shield deflectors were down is that Executor was under the combined fire of the ENTIRE REBEL FLEET (note that shortly before that, Ackbar ordered everyone to concentrate firepower on the super star destroyer!). Cause and effect.

 

 

 

The sensor domes blowing up? Well, the shields had just gone down.

 

 

 

And since the shields were down, and the sensors were crippled, when Piett orders the gunners to intensify forward firepower... well... without sensors the gunners were presumably reduced to tracking their targets manually, making it obscenely difficult to track an A-wing spiralling out of control toward the bridge in the middle of a massive firefight.

[Questor 501]

Oh for the love of Q...

 

 

 

 

 

RE: the domes on top of the bridge

 

 

 

Going temporarily OOC, if you look at the bridge of any modern naval warship, you'll see big geodesic domes. Those are radar domes. Now, that was the design influence of the Star Destroyer bridge, which is why they were intended to be sensor domes.

 

 

 

The reason that someone shouts that the shield deflectors were down is that Executor was under the combined fire of the ENTIRE REBEL FLEET (note that shortly before that, Ackbar ordered everyone to concentrate firepower on the super star destroyer!). Cause and effect.

 

 

 

The sensor domes blowing up? Well, the shields had just gone down.

 

 

 

And since the shields were down, and the sensors were crippled, when Piett orders the gunners to intensify forward firepower... well... without sensors the gunners were presumably reduced to tracking their targets manually, making it obscenely difficult to track an A-wing spiralling out of control toward the bridge in the middle of a massive firefight.

 

 

 

Got you covered.

[Praeothmin 532]

Got you covered.

 

 

 

Got you answered...

[Tyralak 12,068]

Warsies talk about the early Galaxy Class reactors being as stable as Windows ME, yet they conveniently forget the fact that with shields down, and ISD may as well be made of paper-mâché. When the shields on the Executor failed, one A-Wing was able to take out the bridge. This caused a chain reaction which resulted in the reactor going critical. Sounds like a poor design to me.

[enigma 521]

Warsies talk about the early Galaxy Class reactors being as stable as Windows ME, yet they conveniently forget the fact that with shields down, and ISD may as well be made of paper-mâché. When the shields on the Executor failed, one A-Wing was able to take out the bridge. This caused a chain reaction which resulted in the reactor going critical. Sounds like a poor design to me.

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah and the Rebel fleet attack on the Executor did not help weaken the SSD. Yup gotcha.

 

 

 

Love it when Trekkies do that and then ignore the ease of how Trek ships are destroyed. Hell shake it a bit and consoles blow up in their face. I guess surge protectors are lost tech.

[Tyralak 12,068]

Yeah and the Rebel fleet attack on the Executor did not help weaken the SSD. Yup gotcha.

 

 

 

Love it when Trekkies do that and then ignore the ease of how Trek ships are destroyed. Hell shake it a bit and consoles blow up in their face. I guess surge protectors are lost tech.

 

 

 

Weakened with the shields up? Be careful what you're arguing there, Enigma. You could be pulling a Jason, and pwning your own side. (new phrase, BTW "Pulling a Jason")