Jedi Council Forums - Could Star Wars beat up Star Trek?

Jedi Council Forums » JC Community » Your Jedi Council Community

Locked Topic | Read Only Topic | Previous Active Topic | Next Active Topic

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 » - Previous | Next | Reload

Author	Topic: Could Star Wars beat up Star Trek?
slimybug Registered: Aug '01	Date Posted: 6/10/04 3:38pm Subject: RE: Could Star Wars beat up Star Trek? - Date Edited: 6/10/04 3:39pm (2 edits total) Edited By: slimybug
	Dude, if Star Wars had been evolivng techonlogically like they should have been for the past few thousands of years, they would be far moer advanced than they are. Heck, they would probably have become noncorporeal beings, like the elemist (Coompletely different fanboty enrd thing). No, the GFFA has been technologically stagnate for thousands of years. vs. Hmmm... -----signature----- "No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor, dumb bastard die for his country." - General George S. Patton R.I.P. Heath Ledger, 1979-2008. You will be missed.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
HGH Registered: Mar '04	Date Posted: 6/10/04 3:40pm Subject: RE: Could Star Wars beat up Star Trek?
	Quite simply - if Rick Berman continues to helm the Star Trek franchise then it is doomed... At this point in time, Star Wars is on top... -----signature----- I have no witty signature!
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
alpha_red Registered: Aug '03	Date Posted: 6/11/04 8:45pm Subject: RE: Could Star Wars beat up Star Trek? - Date Edited: 6/11/04 8:51pm (1 edits total) Edited By: alpha_red
	Thanks, Robal, for conceding. Otherwise I'd have to unload my uber-physics skillz. Turbolasers are in fact plasma-based weaponry. The New Essential Guide to Vehicles and Vessels refers to them as "turboblasters" on some occasions, ostensibly to weed out the misnomer. Tough task. Also, one has to consider the observed power, no matter what the name of the technology is. Laser or not, the Death Star's main weapon destroyed an entire planet in one shot. Can the Enterprise's main phaser array do that? Apparently in an episode of I believe Voyager, Worf states that the reactors' entire power output is about 800 Gigawatts (GW). Shield power must of course be less than this number. Calculations in the Technical Commentaries establish the power of a Star Destroyer "turbolaser" as between 250 and 2000 Terrawatts (TW). Worf's not in Voyager. Though there's some inconsistency in that, too. In another episode, Data states the power of the Enterprise's reactor as being 12.75 billion GW, while in the TM there's yet another yield given. The prefix for "trillion" is "tera", not "terra." The turbolaser figure is incorrect, actually -- or rather, an incorrect interpretation of correct data. Mr. Saxton and his cohorts in that area, notably Michael Wong and Brian Young, establish the power of a turbolaser as much larger. The figures you cited from Mr. Saxton are stated by both him and Mr. Wong to be an ABSOLUTE LOWER LIMIT. Mr. Saxton also wrote the Star Wars Episode II Incredible Cross Sections, a canon document. In it, he gives the power of a turbolaser at 200 gigatons. A gigaton is a thousand megatons, and a megaton is 4186 terajoules (TJ). A turbolaser blast, judging by frame-by-frame analysis from ESB, takes 1/15 of a second to do its work. Do the math with these figures, and you get a figure of roughly 1e10 TW per turbolaser shot, which yields a sustained output of 5e9 TW. Per gun. This holds a highly entertaining degree of consistency with Michael Wong's Base Delta Zero TL power calculations, which yield figures within an order of magnitude of the above TL power figure. Keep in mind that this figure is based on turbolasers used during the prequel trilogy. If we're operating on the TLs in the Classic Trilogy and post-ROTJ era, the figure will be larger. 12.75 billion GW is 1.275e10 GW, or 1.275e7 TW. As the shield power must be lower than the power of the ship, it would take no more than two shots from any SW capital ship to utterly obliterate the E-D. Not sure about the E, though. However, quantum torps only do as much damage as two proton torpedoes. Think about the power requirements necessary to maintain the monsters that are SW capital ships. The TNG TM states the E-D's main phaser array can output 3.6 MW at full power. The Daystrom Institute Technical Library by Graham Kennedy gives a figure of 85,000 TW, based on things seen in the show. That's 8.5e4 TW versus 1e10 TW. A turbolaser is almost a million times stronger than a phaser, by those calcs. It's kind of impossible to tell whether the actual blaster bolts move slower than bullets. Doubtful, really. Because it's impossible to tell, it's safe to assume that the bolts move at near-C. That notwithstanding, a plasma bolt such as the ones described HAS to move at near-C -- speeds slower than bullets would rob it of the heat and kinetic energy it uses to deal out damage, and such a state would certainly lack the punch to get through stormtrooper armor in a couple of hits, as we see blasters doing. Keep in mind that even though in many cases the stormtrooper armor survives intact, the sheer heat and kinetic force kills the person wearing it through energy transfer -- that is how all weapons do damage, is by transferring energy to a target, whether in terms of heat, or in terms of kinetic energy and its corollary, momentum. Plasma is by nature extremely unstable, and must be delivered at relativistic velocities to a target -- otherwise, it will lose both stability and the ability to do considerable damage. If the example of stormtroopers dying even when the armor survives seems farfetched, consider a medieval mace. It had the power through sheer impact to break bones even if the armor on the attacked knight was not pierced or even dented. -----signature----- Noli manare, manare in memoria. Fleet Junkie, Saxtonian Nightcrawler Yuuzhan'tar GM & EUC Senator \| The strongest bonds are forged in pain. I just officially changed my ship to Jacen/Nen Yim. Eat your heart out, slashers.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Lukes_Lightsaber Registered: Mar '04	Date Posted: 6/11/04 8:48pm Subject: RE: Could Star Wars beat up Star Trek?
	Who let Data into the thread? -----signature----- "They're gaining on us! Can this thing do light speed?" "You bet your asteroid, kid."
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
alpha_red Registered: Aug '03	Date Posted: 6/11/04 8:52pm Subject: RE: Could Star Wars beat up Star Trek? - Date Edited: 6/11/04 8:53pm (1 edits total) Edited By: alpha_red
	I let myself in with my mad ninja skillz. You'll find that the guards are missing their consciousness, their wallets, and the phone numbers of their exes. Which says something about the people you employ to guard your threads, doesn't it? -----signature----- Noli manare, manare in memoria. Fleet Junkie, Saxtonian Nightcrawler Yuuzhan'tar GM & EUC Senator \| The strongest bonds are forged in pain. I just officially changed my ship to Jacen/Nen Yim. Eat your heart out, slashers.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Wolf Registered: Sep '02	Date Posted: 6/11/04 8:56pm Subject: RE: Could Star Wars beat up Star Trek? - Date Edited: 6/11/04 8:56pm (1 edits total) Edited By: Wolf
	Hmm so your judging that they arn't lasers by the way they look? Yet it is perfectly ok in Star Wars verse that you can walk and talk and hell not have their skin melt in space with mearly a air mask on? Physics really shouldn't be used to make proofs for star wars calculations since they weren't even concidered when it was created. -----signature----- www.sgalaxy.com www.sg-city.com Best MMPG around! FREE Unlimited Trial!
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
alpha_red Registered: Aug '03	Date Posted: 6/11/04 9:06pm Subject: RE: Could Star Wars beat up Star Trek? - Date Edited: 6/11/04 9:10pm (1 edits total) Edited By: alpha_red
	Hmm so your judging that they arn't lasers by the way they look? Yet it is perfectly ok in Star Wars verse that you can walk and talk and hell not have their skin melt in space with mearly a air mask on? Physics really shouldn't be used to make proofs for star wars calculations since they weren't even concidered when it was created. No. We are judging that turboBLASTERS do not use lasers as their method of delivering damage based on the way the blasts behave in a physical sense. In fact, phaser blasts actually look and behave MORE like lasers than those of SW ships. They use rapid nadion reactions to fuel their blasts. The problem with rapid nadion reactions is that we don't know what the hell a rapid nadion is. Of course, no explosion ensues from a phaser blast to a living creature, so we must assume something else happens. Most phasers in fact are very ineffective against anything but living matter. Only the most powerful phaser rifles do much damage to anything else. Two measurements are available to ascertain this -- SEM and NDF. I forget what the first stands for, but it means destruction to living matter. The second means Nuclear Disruption Force. Some extremely powerful phasers have a high SEM:NDF ratio, but the most powerful phaser rifle in the Federation only has a 1:40 SEM/NDF ratio at the highest setting, and discharges...I'll calculate it in a bit. Skin doesn't melt in space. It freezes. And if you'll recall the gas, there was clearly an atmosphere inside the creature's belly, as well as heating systems. We don't know much about the anatomy of physiology of 900-meter-long space slugs, but judging that Han and Leia could walk around in there I'd say we can judge what said anatomy and physiology does. You're right that physics weren't considered in the creation of Star Wars. That doesn't erase the fact that it can be rationalized with physics. As much as many people hate KJA, he covered GL's ass with the Maw explanation of Han's quote about making the Kessel Run in less than 12 parsecs. Btw, I just pulled out my TNG TM. The shield rating of the Enterprise-D is 730,000 MW. -----signature----- Noli manare, manare in memoria. Fleet Junkie, Saxtonian Nightcrawler Yuuzhan'tar GM & EUC Senator \| The strongest bonds are forged in pain. I just officially changed my ship to Jacen/Nen Yim. Eat your heart out, slashers.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
evil_sockpuppet Registered: Apr '04	Date Posted: 6/11/04 9:17pm Subject: RE: Could Star Wars beat up Star Trek?
	On the issue of Star Wars vs. Star Trek, SW definitely has better costumes, if that means anything. -----signature----- I'm not bad... I'm just drawn that way.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Eva_Pilot04 Registered: Nov '01	Date Posted: 6/11/04 9:18pm Subject: RE: Could Star Wars beat up Star Trek?
	So what are we supposed to base assumptions on? The default "trek ships look more advanced, therefore they are" argument? Sure, power output and physics weren't considered when SW (the OT) was created because gee... Lucas thought story elements should be more than throwing around technobabble. In the absence of any data from the source materiel, there's no choice but to go by observed characteristics. The calculations given by Saxton, Wong, and alpha_red seem to match up with what we see on screen... and the observed power of SW weapons seems to be far greater than those of Trek. »Who dares wins« -----signature----- OMG!!! There are coloured people on my WUL!!! ------------------ Only a bootlegger deals in Absolut.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
alpha_red Registered: Aug '03	Date Posted: 6/11/04 9:32pm Subject: RE: Could Star Wars beat up Star Trek? - Date Edited: 6/11/04 9:33pm (1 edits total) Edited By: alpha_red
	Lucas thought story elements should be more than throwing around technobabble. Now we're into subjective elements here. Some people would dispute that Lucas still thinks that way. I do not. That's what I loved about the original Star Trek and to a lesser extent, TNG and DS9. Yes, I actually like DS9, though the original Trek exemplifies story elements and character instead of technobabble. The characters are so easy to get into and enjoy -- a feat that few series since then have been able to match. It has been said that Star Wars actually made Star Trek a moneymaker, because the increased interest in sci-fi following the CT's production led to the production of Star Trek movies and TNG. As for my favorite ST movie, it'd have to be 4 and First Contact, followed by The Undiscovered Country and Insurrection. Eva: That's why they make the various sourcebook materials for both franchises. I need to get my hands on a copy of DS9's TM. -----signature----- Noli manare, manare in memoria. Fleet Junkie, Saxtonian Nightcrawler Yuuzhan'tar GM & EUC Senator \| The strongest bonds are forged in pain. I just officially changed my ship to Jacen/Nen Yim. Eat your heart out, slashers.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Eva_Pilot04 Registered: Nov '01	Date Posted: 6/11/04 9:41pm Subject: RE: Could Star Wars beat up Star Trek?
	Yeah, that's why I had that parenthetical nod to the OT. So far, the PT has been crap on film IMHO. I'm not saying I don't like trek either. I thought the dominion war storyline from DS9 was better than your usual trek fare, and the original series was great. I just think that in a war between the GFFA and the trek universe would be grossly one-sided in the GFFA's favour. And yeah, I've read the technical manuals, but some of them seem to indicate that even Slave I could take out the Enterprise D with little trouble. Who knows, maybe they're right. »Who dares wins« -----signature----- OMG!!! There are coloured people on my WUL!!! ------------------ Only a bootlegger deals in Absolut.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
alpha_red Registered: Aug '03	Date Posted: 6/11/04 9:49pm Subject: RE: Could Star Wars beat up Star Trek? - Date Edited: 6/11/04 9:54pm (3 edits total) Edited By: alpha_red
	And yeah, I've read the technical manuals, but some of them seem to indicate that even Slave I could take out the Enterprise D with little trouble. Who knows, maybe they're right. They are. The Slave I's "laser" cannons deliver 64,000 GW into a target with each successful hit, according to the Incredible Cross Sections from AOTC. This is entertainingly close to Michael Wong's calculations of an X-wing's laser power in ANH, as having a lower limit of 30 TJ. Anything within about 100 times a given power yield is considered very close. But that's not the point. The point is enjoyment. Hell, give the Federation 20,000 years, and then we can talk about it. But I could just as easily imagine an alliance between the Federation and, well, the Alliance. I like the PT so far, actually. TPM may not have had the best writing, but its historical significance is tremendous. A well-versed student of history will find an incredible amount of depth in the story it tells. I actually think it's cooler to show Anakin as a very young child -- it only accentuates the evil he becomes. And AOTC is good about the history, too, but its characters just ruled. I don't care what anyone says about Hayden Christensen -- he owns the screen, as do Ewan and Natalie. Of course, no one's bothered to ask the real question yet. That question is: Who would win in an Irish drinking contest, Kirk or Han? -----signature----- Noli manare, manare in memoria. Fleet Junkie, Saxtonian Nightcrawler Yuuzhan'tar GM & EUC Senator \| The strongest bonds are forged in pain. I just officially changed my ship to Jacen/Nen Yim. Eat your heart out, slashers.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Eva_Pilot04 Registered: Nov '01	Date Posted: 6/11/04 10:01pm Subject: RE: Could Star Wars beat up Star Trek?
	TPM wasn't bad. In fact, the more I watch it, the more I like that film over AOTC. The story flows better, and it's a lot cleaner. But TPM forces other, more important, aspects of Anakin's rise and fall to become too rushed. Episode III has to include a number of events that would have been better placed over the course of two movies than just one. I agree about what showing a very young Anakin does dramatically, but with a few alterations, AOTC would have been a better episode I. But I'm getting way off topic here. Kirk wins the drinking contest. He'd drink Han under the table and then take home a green alien babe on each arm. »Who dares wins« -----signature----- OMG!!! There are coloured people on my WUL!!! ------------------ Only a bootlegger deals in Absolut.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
JediMasterKitFisto Registered: Aug '02	Date Posted: 6/11/04 10:04pm Subject: RE: Could Star Wars beat up Star Trek?
	You dare ask this on a SW message board? -----signature----- -JMKF All your base are belong to us. If the above post has upset you in any way Live with it w00t!
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
alpha_red Registered: Aug '03	Date Posted: 6/11/04 10:06pm Subject: RE: Could Star Wars beat up Star Trek?
	LOL! Amen to that. I guess that's why Kirk doesn't fly the ship. -----signature----- Noli manare, manare in memoria. Fleet Junkie, Saxtonian Nightcrawler Yuuzhan'tar GM & EUC Senator \| The strongest bonds are forged in pain. I just officially changed my ship to Jacen/Nen Yim. Eat your heart out, slashers.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 » - Previous | Next | Reload

Jedi Council Forums » JC Community » Your Jedi Council Community